Laaltain

Awami Workers Party: Opportunities and Challenges

1 فروری، 2013

The for­ma­tion of the Awa­mi Work­ers’ Par­ty (AWP) by merg­er of three main left­ist par­ties has been cau­tious­ly wel­comed by social move­ments and pro­gres­sive sec­tions of Pak­istani soci­ety. After its rel­e­ga­tion to the fringes of Pak­istani soci­ety over three decades ago, the Left fur­ther iso­lat­ed itself by small sec­tar­i­an groups engaged in fight­ing “ide­o­log­i­cal” bat­tles with each oth­er, instead of ana­lyz­ing or inter­ven­ing in any mean­ing­ful way in chang­ing the socio-polit­i­cal land­scape of Pak­istan. The merg­er is seen by many as a pos­si­bil­i­ty of mov­ing beyond nihilis­tic pol­i­tics (includ­ing that of the Left) by for­mu­lat­ing a coher­ent Left alter­na­tive.

The merg­er process is also linked to the par­tic­u­lar unfold­ing of His­to­ry in our times, as the shat­ter­ing of the neo-lib­er­al con­sen­sus (fol­low­ing the finan­cial cri­sis), paves the way for a new round of strug­gles against the preva­lent order, what Alain Badiou has recent­ly called the ‘Rebirth of His­to­ry’. This opens up new avenues for rad­i­cal pol­i­tics around the world that the Left is try­ing to grap­ple with, albeit with vary­ing degrees of suc­cess, and the Pak­istani Left’s deci­sion to unite is part of this process of seri­ous­ly engag­ing with the oppor­tu­ni­ties and chal­lenges posed by this new glob­al polit­i­cal con­jec­ture.

Anoth­er rea­son for the enthu­si­asm, debate, dis­cus­sion and crit­i­cisms of this merg­er, despite the numer­i­cal­ly weak posi­tion of the AWP vis-a-vis main­stream par­ties, is because it claims to rep­re­sent an idea that has moved mil­lions, par­tic­u­lar­ly in the 20th cen­tu­ry. At an abstract lev­el, it is the idea of equal­i­ty, an idea pow­er­ful enough to make peas­ants in Viet­nam stand up to the might of the US war-machine, and one that allowed mil­lions of activists to bear the brunt of lone­ly iso­la­tion dur­ing peri­ods of incar­cer­a­tion, only because the cause was wor­thy enough of such a sac­ri­fice. Despite the rel­a­tive numer­i­cal weak­ness of the Left, this idea remains etched in the polit­i­cal uncon­scious of this coun­try, and cer­tain­ly in that of the rul­ing class, who often go to any extent in sup­press­ing any pos­si­bil­i­ty of dis­sent that threat­ens their priv­i­lege.

While defend­ing the AWP against what I believe are ulta-Left posi­tions by cer­tain sec­tar­i­an Marx­ists, I want to point to some real hur­dles that the par­ty will have to over­come as it tries to become a rel­e­vant force in Pak­istani pol­i­tics.

Chal­lenges for the Par­ty

There are some very gen­uine con­cerns on the abil­i­ty of the AWP to turn into a mass par­ty in the coun­try. I will high­light two major caus­es for con­cern. First of course, is the threat of dis­in­te­gra­tion, or what is termed in Left­ist cir­cles as a ‘split.’ There are often two main rea­sons for such recur­rent splits in the Pak­istani Left. First is the belief in absolute puri­ty of a polit­i­cal orga­ni­za­tion, cou­pled with the belief that two peo­ple can con­sti­tute a rev­o­lu­tion­ary ‘orga­ni­za­tion.’ The lack of homo­gene­ity with­in the AWP is seen by some Left­ists as its weak­ness, rather than its strength. One hopes that such juve­nile, apo­lit­i­cal and anti-plu­ral­ist views have already been super­seded as the three par­ties decid­ed to merge into one large polit­i­cal par­ty with admit­ted­ly dif­fer­ent ide­o­log­i­cal trends.
The sec­ond major rea­son for such splits is a lack of inter­nal democ­ra­cy through the sup­pres­sion of dis­sent­ing views. This pos­es a greater chal­lenge for the uni­ty of the AWP since the lead­er­ship and the work­ers of the par­ty will have to set new polit­i­cal tra­di­tions by debat­ing and engag­ing with dif­fer­ent ideas with­out accus­ing the oth­ers of being ‘trai­tors’ for sim­ply air­ing their opin­ion. If the AWP is able to cre­ate an atmos­phere for open and frank inter­nal dis­cus­sions, it will also cre­ate the pos­si­bil­i­ty of intro­duc­ing inno­v­a­tive ideas in Left pol­i­tics in the coun­try.

The sec­ond fun­da­men­tal task for the AWP is to devel­op with orga­ni­za­tion­al strate­gies to intro­duce an alter­na­tive in Pakistan’s pol­i­tics. This is an incred­i­bly dif­fi­cult task. Large parts of the coun­try are in the grips of vio­lence, the numer­i­cal strength of the orga­nized work­ing class has decreased sig­nif­i­cant­ly, the trade union move­ment in the coun­try is in a dire con­di­tion, the women’s rights move­ment has been tamed through NGO-fund­ing, and most pop­u­lar pol­i­tics revolves around patron­age. In such cir­cum­stances, how does the new par­ty envi­sion a rup­ture with pol­i­tics as usu­al? What are the new forms of analy­sis and strate­gies that are required to for­mu­late an ade­quate response to such his­tor­i­cal cir­cum­stances? There are no easy answers to such ques­tions, but such issues must be con­front­ed if the par­ty wants to tru­ly move beyond the coor­di­nates of con­tem­po­rary pol­i­tics in Pak­istan.

Rebirth of the Polit­i­cal Sub­ject, or Why you should join the AWP

Since the rise of neo-lib­er­al gov­ern­men­tal­i­ty, the fig­ure of a ‘detached intel­lec­tu­al’ is praised as the ide­al polit­i­cal com­men­ta­tor. It means that the intel­lec­tu­al gains her/his legit­i­ma­cy by not tak­ing sides in a con­flict and stay­ing ‘neu­tral’, since being attached to a polit­i­cal orga­ni­za­tion reduces her chances of being ‘objec­tive.’ More­over, and this is cru­cial, it means that an intellectual’s role is sim­ply to for­mu­late crit­i­cisms from the out­side, to give cor­rec­tives to move­ments and par­ties, but not be asso­ci­at­ed with them.

To the extent that such self-reflex­iv­i­ty emerges from a cri­tique of dog­mat­ic Left­ist prac­tices through­out the 20th Cen­tu­ry, it should be wel­comed. There is, how­ev­er, some­thing incred­i­bly dis­em­pow­er­ing about the idea that the only site to ana­lyze a polit­i­cal process is from out­side of it. For exam­ple, for a dis­pas­sion­ate observ­er, the use of vio­lence in the Russ­ian rev­o­lu­tion, or the anti-colo­nial strug­gles in India or Alge­ria might sim­ply seem exam­ples of ‘need­less vio­lence.’ How­ev­er, one is lent an incred­i­bly dif­fer­ent insight into these events if one reads Lenin on the Russ­ian Rev­o­lu­tion or Bhaghat Singh and Frantz Fanon to under­stand the sub­jec­tive nature of this vio­lence. It is through the fideli­ty of such intel­lec­tu­als to the strug­gle, and the clear and unam­bigu­ous choic­es they made, that they were tru­ly able to bring forth the his­tor­i­cal con­jec­ture in which the ques­tion of vio­lence vs. non-vio­lence begins to make sense.

It is now time to re-engage with pol­i­tics through pre­cise­ly such sub­jec­tive inter­ven­tions, by choos­ing sides and fol­low­ing through with the con­se­quences of those choic­es. One can remain crit­i­cal of the project one engages with, and one only needs to read the writ­ings of quin­tes­sen­tial rev­o­lu­tion­ar­ies such as Bhaghat Singh and Fanon to under­stand this point, yet main­tain fideli­ty to the cause. The AWP is not sim­ply an orga­ni­za­tion that we need to ana­lyze and com­ment upon. It is some­thing that we must engage with and play an active role in, espe­cial­ly since it is preg­nant with so many pos­si­bil­i­ties. Left activists, par­tic­u­lar­ly the youth, can play a vital role in shap­ing the polit­i­cal tra­jec­to­ry of the New Left in the coun­try through their pas­sion­ate engage­ment with it.

The spec­tac­u­lar fail­ure of cap­i­tal­ism around the world has shat­tered the lib­er­al con­sen­sus on the capac­i­ty of this order to per­pet­u­ate itself eter­nal­ly. The break­down of this con­sen­sus has pro­vid­ed an oppor­tu­ni­ty for the inter­na­tion­al Left to pro­pose an alter­na­tive to the cur­rent cri­sis. But it is also giv­ing rise to nationalist/fascist ten­den­cies around the globe. In Pak­istan, the sit­u­a­tion is grim­mer since the absence of the Left has result­ed in the choice between reli­gious and sta­tist mil­i­ta­riza­tion and lib­er­al hypocrisy. Giv­en this his­tor­i­cal tra­jec­to­ry, and the ter­ri­ble con­se­quences that can flow from it, it is all the more impor­tant to become involved in con­struct­ing a rad­i­cal alter­na­tive to keep alive the hypoth­e­sis of equal­i­ty and free­dom.

—Writ­ten By Ammar Ali Jan

(Pub­lished in The Laal­tain — Issue 6)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *