Cultural ‘Capital’ and Language of Empires

How it is that, modernization is almost synonymous with westernization and English has emerged as the representative language of globalization? What about rise of Persian with persianization, rise of Islam with Arabization?  rise of Turks with Turkization? What about Spanish speaking people in Latin America and French speaking class in North Africa? In fact, transnational languages are footprints of the past empires. Middle East and Central Asia are considered as graveyard of empires and although there are no more empires but the lingual divides and the continuing competition of languages over populations are still reminding us of the legacies of those majestic empires.  Pakistan is an interesting case study is this regard.

The national language of Pakistan is Urdu and Urdu speaking community is called Muhajir (Immigrants) because they emigrated from North India during partition of India-Pakistan. In fact, Urdu is a legacy of Mughal Empire and is very recent to be added to the family of languages and people of North India adapted it (created it during Mughal Empire). Likewise, English is the official language of Pakistan and it is the legacy of English Empire. Just as English Empire had replaced Mughal Empire, similarly, the English language had first replaced Persian as an official language and then slowly distorting/enriching Urdu by replacing Persian and Arabic words and expressions in it.

I think, the best explanation can be Pierre Bourdieu’s theory of “Cultural Capital”. He has borrowed the concept from Marx Capital and hence represents any cultural aspect (education, intellect, style of speech, dress, and even physical appearance, et cetera) that helps social mobility. Language stands at the core of cultural capital and it really explains why, with the rise of each empire, the language of empire was adapted by other people. It really explains why founders of Pakistan adapted Urdu as a national language and English as official language. Urdu was the heritage of Muslim (Mughal) empire (glorious past) but English was the coinage of current empire. 

It is interesting to note that, despite of very obvious influence of cultural capital on every segments of modern societies, Marxist movements  of last century and even recent 99% movement were largely based on economic class divide. And that is because cultural capital are the products of economic and social capitals. By increasing digitalization of the social institutions, the influence of the cultural capital are deepening. Seeing the people of previous generation, even those who weren't able to read and write properly are struggling to catch up with basic technologies are an indication of a social urgency and the role that cultural capital  is playing in it. 

First as Tragedy, Then as Farce

"There is no such thing as a 'self-made' man. We are made up of thousands of others." George Matthew Adams ... Perhaps, that is the core concept behind the sense of social responsibility. Naturally, we tend to give back, what we have received from others. But what if someone tells us that, we need to rethink the ways that we give back as they are not doing the "good" that we intended to? Very few people invest thoughts in their actions, especially in actions that are appreciated by dominate culture. Aside from a bunch of flakes, who question the norms, people usually follow the norms and it makes the saying of Louis Althusser appear true, "Ideology has very little to do with 'consciousness' - it is profoundly unconscious."...

In his talk, "First as Tragedy, Then as Farce", Zizek criticizes the capitalist philanthropic practices based on the assumptions, that they are just addressing the symptoms, not causes. I agree with him on this, but I have a question here... 

Let's assume that, you go to Starbucks to buy your coffee and the ads says, part of the price goes to an extremist madrassah, what would be your reaction? What, if the ads explains that, your money is spent for a good cause of "educating" poor children in some remote place? Well, I assume, that doesn't require much thinking as by now, it is a common knowledge, that these madrassahs have become part of problem instead of solution. They produce people who lack skills to get them jobs (to become a useful part of society) and instead, they have the mindsets to  make them as readily available recruits of militants.

Even if for a while, we assume that the "education" in those madrassahs are harmless and are just for moral training and literacy, again read this description of the "education" in those schools to learn, how they produce just waste, "In this part of the world, writing as a category has not been recognized for centuries although the word used for Muslim school is Maktab which literally means the place where you write. But in Maktabs there has been no writing done at least after 12th century. These are, in the words of Dr Sarfaraz, ‘oral societies’ in that the method of teaching in their religious schools is mostly oral — individual to individual with no use of conventional teaching aids, such as the black boards, chalks, and markers."

Although it is plausible to question, the way capitalist philanthropists invest but I wonder, why after more than a decade of "war on terror" no one has questioned the donations of those Shaikhs who support these madrassah and still do business in billions with countries that have prioritized the war on terror as the prime objective of their foreign policy? Why they have remained immune of the smart sanctions? (May be, it is just asking a  wrong question as those Shaikhs are frenemies. Next joke please!!!)

If we just limit ourselves to questions of the intellectuals again, I understand that, it has a popular demand to question element of popular culture that everybody is familiar with. Skipping serious questions that have less public appeal is the characteristic of "cultural capitalism". The Socialist revolutionaries have reduced to public entertainers. I don't know, what to call it, "reverse revolution" or "reverse evolution"? whatever, it is really amusing in itself. 

Culture is a Stronger Force than Religion

Seemingly, it might look a very strong statement but as a matter of fact, by each new evidence, I am becoming  more convinced that culture is much stronger force than religion and historical-global-process, such as modernity. I have stopped looking to people of regions based on their religious affiliations and modernization movements but instead got interested to look, how religion and modernization have reshaped by respective cultures.

In previous century, people might had high hopes for new movements both in secular and religious hemispheres. Communism's equality, Capitalism's liberty and Islamic movement's Justice had great promises  that appealed to  masses that a large chunk of people thought them, worth dying for, but in the age of internet, it is becoming evident, that humans are far from balanced by nature. The recorded brutalities, available on you tube is sufficient evidence (at least for me) that humans think, talk and like to appear as humane and civilized, but are too weak to their nature, when they have the power to make choices between evil and good.

Usually, we see the rationalizations of savage acts, either by name of social engineering or an act of religious devotion (a religious obligation) but what about the practices that have only an element of pleasure with them? How can we justify them other than human nature?

Middle East is thought as the birthplace of civilizations, graveyard of empires and the birthplace of Abrahamic Religions but watching the following video report, I felt as no empire, civilization and religion has touched this place. Dubai is seen as the symbol of modernization in the Middle East and yet the child slavery is an evidence that culture is much a strong force than religion and historical processes.  

So, Afghanistan was supposed to be on the ancient Silk road, cross-road of civilizations, the cultivating ground for Jihadists, the launching pad of communism and now melting pot of westernization and modernization. But apparently, none of these processes have been able to influence the cultures there. The culture of "dancing boys" have defied all these processes just to reassert, that culture is much a strong force than religion and global processes.

 

Just recently, four women and two men were sentenced to death in Kohistan area of Pakistan and reportedly, the four women were killed because the women had sung songs and men had danced in front of them (Kohistan video scandal: 4 women killed ). Even if the culture is beyond the common sense, against religion and Human Rights, again it is the culture that is going to reshape all those forces. 

To me, it is no more surprise why the violent sides of religions, sports and entertainment attract more certain regions and segment of societies, while the same are disgusted by others? It is quite understandable that cultures that promote and appreciate violent aspects of human nature have the tendency to look, appreciate and enjoy violent aspects of religion, sports and entertainments. 

The video that was used in sentencing to death, the four women and two men that appeared in it.

John Cleese on Creativity

Pessimism is learnt by suggestions

Some folklore stick to heart as they are sweet embodiment of hard-learned lessons, that people want to pass on. I guess, the following Hazaragi folklore was everybody's favorite, when they were young and weren't getting why teachers are so annoying,

There was a Mullah in the village, who was teaching Quran to students but he was really hard, when it came to misspellings. He was punishing students by beating them with sticks and students were looking for a way to get rid of him. One of the students comes with a solution. Next morning, when they go to mosque, the Mullah asks as usual the students to come forward one by one and read aloud, their lessons. As the first student arrives, he asks Mullah, why  he looks so pale today? Does he feel fine? Mullah gets angry and beat him with stick and replies, I am perfectly fine. But all the students repeat the same questions on their turns. Mullah becomes curious that he might be looking pale as everyone is not only noticing it but inquiring about it. When the students leave, he looks himself in the mirror and finds to his amazement, that he really looks tired and pale. In coming days, the students repeat the same practice and each day that Mullah looks himself in the mirror, he finds that the paleness is becoming more evident. Moreover, by each passing day, he feels really tired and exhausted. So, he starts looking for a remedy. After a week or so of persistent suggestions, the Mullah really gets sick enough to not be able to come to mosque and students get rid of him. It was just a suggestive disease.

Well, it might appear only a folklore but by reading Jane Brody's article, "A Richer Life by Seeing Half Glass Full", it reminded me of this story that was my favorite, when I was young but didn't have the courage to practice it. In fact, we do it often to others, mostly without knowing it, by discouraging them with our "suggestive rationales". 

I understand that, genes play a role in optimism and pessimism but it is also now known, that most of them are learnt. So, if there are prevalent pessimism, no doubt, it will affect most of people so in an age, when people are tightly connected and messages pass very quickly, there is a need for a more responsible and more careful behavior in suggesting things.