Mandela, Thank You and Farewell

In rememberence of the passing of a man who symbolised freedom, triumph and hope, I reproduce here, the lyrics of the protest song by Special AKA. The lyrics by Jerry Dammers written at a time when Mandela was incarcirated formed part of the movement to end apartheid. Another 6 years were to pass before Nelson Mandela was to emerge from his political imprisonment. 

I remember the televising of Nelson Mandela's walk to freedom and in the months to follow the images of black South Africans lining up to for miles when they were granted the right to vote for the first time. Mandela, who became President, may not have closed the opportunity gaps between white and black South Africans, but he will be remembered for his belief in the fight for equality and the hope and possibility of redress and reconciliation.

Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela (18 July 1918 – 5 December 2013). Sir, we love you.

Nelson Mandela

(Jerry Dammers/Special AKA)

Free Nelson Mandela
Free free
Free free free Nelson Mandela

Free Nelson Mandela

21* years in captivity
Shoes too small to fit his feet
His body abused, but his mind is still free
Are you so blind that you cannot see

Free Nelson Mandela
Free Nelson Mandela

Visited the causes at the AMC
Only one man in a large army
Are you so blind that you cannot see
Are you so deaf that you cannot hear him

Free Nelson Mandela
Free Nelson Mandela

21* tears in captivity
Are you so blind that you cannot see
Are you so deaf that you cannot hear him
Are you so dumb that you cannot speak

Free Nelson Mandela
Free Nelson Mandela

Nelson Mandela
Nelson Mandela

*27 years, in fact

A Song for Peace - سوله

بریښنا امیل - سوله

Quite understandably, I guess, we Pashtuns are good at lamenting our troubles in our music and poetry. I like the optimism in this song however and Sola (Peace) by Brekhna Ameel gives us a chance to savour the positivity. May Allah be merciful and guide us.

'Free' Schools

I learned a long time ago to trust my own judgement and instincts and this has been at odds with the system I have found myself in over the recent past. In fact, over the last year, one of the things I have increasingly noticed about schools is how conditioned teachers can be. I don't know about others, but I resent operating within a straight-jacketed learning environment. So, last week, when I was offered another role at another school outside the state system, I confess to some sense of relief. It remains to be seen how much there will be an attempt to quash individuality, but having worked in three continents in many schools delivering different curricula, I think it is fair to say that I am able to pick and choose with some sense of informed accuracy and experience.

The demand for alternative types of schooling indicates how many of us believe that there are many forms of education that offer a much wider (or specific) set of experiences for acquiring skills and knowledge. Within this broad range, in schools that do not operate under direct state or local authority control (such as free schools, academies, home-schooling, independent schools etc.), a 'teacher' may not have a state-issued certificate or teaching license.

How important is this? In short, a teacher is someone who inspires, motivates, cares, and is willing to impart their skills and knowledge. By virtue, anyone who does this, from parent, to a highly-skilled artist, to a classroom practitioner or a colleague, is a teacher. It is not necessarily someone who has spent hours studying at an institution being trained in pedagogy and educational ideology. In fact this process of training may institutionalise them and narrow them as teachers by removing their openness and passion.

It is rather surprising then that the Deputy PM, Nick Clegg should have spoken this week about ensuring that all teachers in free schools needing to be 'qualified' (i.e.'certified'). Do we mean ideologically programmed to lack an alternative view? This too, from a man who was educated privately (that is, outside the state system) where there are more creative educational freedoms? It all sounds rather hypocritical, both for him to speak and for him to expect. I speak as a 'certified'/'qualified' teacher (UK/EU) who is passionate about the rights of educators for sound pay and conditions where clearly that is not what he is speaking of.

There has been something of an understandable media backlash over the past few weeks on 'free schools' following investigations into mismanagement, quality of service or misappropriation of budgets. I am not here to defend this or previous government's educational policies and understand that there is that element of controversy when it comes to public money being spent on alternative education. That is a completely separate issue. I strongly believe, however, in the principle that freedom in education is what makes it so appealing and worth fighting for and that many of the most enriching experiences for children/students do not necessarily stem from the institutionalised forms of education.

Still from: Another Brick in the Wall Pt 2 (Education) by Pink Floyd
Further Opinion: Nick Clegg and his thoughts on Qualified Teachers

Elephant in the [Class] Room

Daniel Hoffman-Gill offers an interesting opinion on the alienation of the white working classes in the UK. Essentially, he does not want to see this group left behind and the comments that follow his blog posting highlight the differing (read 'divisive') points of view on the issue. Whatever we think however, it remains true, that white working class children have the lowest levels of academic achievement in schools and remain the most socially immobile of all the demographic groups within the UK (see the Joseph Rowntree Report). Invariably, schools that take these children in will have a bigger cultural issue to tackle in their communities that they serve and are challenged with breaking a culture of low aspiration at the individual, parental and societal level. It's a tall order.  

Sir Robin Bosher of the Harris Federation of Academies, describes his findings: "I see about 10 per cent in each class who are so unsociable that they hurt others, adults and other young children. But they’re unsociable because they’ve no practice at being sociable." Compare that to other 'poor' groups - European Muslim migrants, people learning in a non-native language and so on. Think also of people in the developing world who live a hand-to-mouth existence who also start off with disadvantage. The difference is, in general, these groups tend to value education and see it as a key to social mobility. 

As an educator, with a body of experience in several countries, it goes without saying that I believe that education is an important means to meet the needs of the wider social good. I cannot ignore, however, that in England education is way too (negatively) politicised and this makes education as a public service vulnerable to constant government manipulation. The challenges, however, of being at the chalk-face on a daily basis means that educators have a different perspective on the social matters that children bring into school and meeting the needs of the white working class is not as simple as another set of reforms. 

It would be fair to conclude that essentially 65 years of exhaustive educational reform in the UK has not delivered on closing the educational achievement gaps for white working class children or driving up their aspirations. The occasional examples that highlight traditionally working class people being the first in their families to access higher education are something of an illusory distraction. Progress to university remains a mainly upwardly mobile, middle-class aspiration. 

The social mobility arguments remain at the cornerstone of the 'moral purpose' behind education and there is some expectation that schools pick up the task of changing social and behavioural cultures. Scaled up on a nationwide level, is this possible or appropriate? I would understand if people thought that education plays a part in social reform, but in all honestly, despite the many dedicated professional educators who reach out to vulnerable communities, nearly 70 years after the post war education reforms began, who is actually responsible for breaking the culture of non-aspiration? Do we continue to respond to white working class low achievement with more resources or changing how teachers and schools are judged? 

Elephant in the [Class] Room 

It would be wise to stop, pause and consider why (and for whom) we aim to push through unchecked reforms. Are we missing the elephant in the room? What is it about white working class children that puts obstacles in their paths for achievement? Should our responses be 'politically challenging' rather than 'politically correct'? Is it okay to be critical of a consumerist, hedonistic culture that doesn't prioritise education? Can we honestly expect a completely universal educational approach/examinations system to work for all? Can we accept equality when we live is a society divided by class and race? Should political interventions be removed once and for all from education?

Malala Yousafzai commented a few weeks ago about British teenagers not appreciating their educational opportunities. She was right. I have seen schools in Afghanistan and Pakistan and know the conditions under which children learn. They aspire for better and in the most dangerous and poorly funded conditions, the fight for education is being bravely fronted by children. In comparison children in the UK are very fortunate and to have a public educational culture that is supported by a generous financial investment per pupil that remains amongst the highest in the world. Isn't a quality, free education a very real golden opportunity that some are simply giving up?

There is an elephant in the room. Are we prepared to admit it?

Find out more about Education Reform here

History of Education in the UK: Wikipedia
Arc of Underachievement: BBC
The Underclass: Prisma

To Tweet or to Blog?

I've been busy and a lot has happened in the world since my last posting so it's easy to let important events slip. Perhaps this is because we are forced to sometimes tune out of this world is that is bulging in information overload. With the sheer volume of news stories being run in the media at any particular time we are making an important choice and allow in only what is relevant into our conciousness. At least, I find I do. We can even develop a resistance to the shock and the negative energy that is the news. I have come to the conclusion that sometimes TV news must come in small doses and that in order to hold on to my own sanity it is wise to just switch off and to accept that there are only some things I am able to change.

And so, this past month, news stories have come and gone. Whilst seemingly on a sabbatical from Blogger, I have been updating things of interest on Twitter. Sometimes I don't have as much to say or, I don't want to carry the burdens of the world on my heart and soul. With Twitter, I can easily flag up a story or article of interest whilst I'm on the go. Blogger requires me to sit down when I have a quiet moment. I'm sure someone out there will be doing a study on the links between the different users of social media and the technologies they use. Broadly I go with Twitter for mobile technologies such as my Smartphone and Blogging when I'm at my home laptop (other matters having been dealt with). 

So here I am, nothing much to react to at the moment, but that's okay. Sanity is important.

The Richard Dawkins Tweet

Richard Dawkins's infamous Tweet that the entire Muslim world has had fewer Nobels (10) than Cambridge University's Trinity College (32) has invited both support and opposition. Political correctness might dictate that he should not have spoken, but as an atheist whose scientific/socially liberal viewpoints line up with popular sentiment his tweet is pointed out as one example of Western irreverence towards religion. The coin has a flip-side too; we live in a world where Islam is feared and Muslims are vilified. It is easy to target Muslims and get away with it.

Dawkins is not alone in attacking Muslims for their lack of achievements; I know many  Muslims who share the  same critical view of themselves. At the present time, Muslims do not export their cultural achievements well. We live, at best in a nostalgic past. Our human rights records, as an example, is little more to be proud of than our list of Nobel honours and more Muslims are dying at the hands of other Muslims in a kind of fratricidal in-war than directly at the hands of Western interventionist forces. Elsewhere, Muslims are caught up in a loop of blame, low achievement, bad governance, cultural destruction and self-pity. In summary, we're on something of a downer. Something is deeply wrong and for Muslims this requires some deep and sober appreciation.

The low ebb for Muslims sits within a much larger context (of power, control and prejudice). For a start, Dawkins could have easily substituted 'Muslims' in his Tweet for any other group or demographic. According to the Christian Monitor, other large (billion-plus) religious, gender and ethnic groups have won even fewer Nobels than the ten won by Muslims. Hindus have won four, the Chinese have won eight and Africans have won nine. Note also that women have only won 44 Nobel Prizes, compared with 791 for (mostly) white men. Frankly, Nobel Prizes are a largely Western affair - all the more grating since one of four people in the world are Muslim.

The Nobel Prizes were inaugurated in 1901 at a time when Muslims were still under the long shadow of colonial rule. Alfred Nobel (inventor of dynamite) may have emphasised recognition of scientific and technological discoveries and inventions, but since its launch, the awarding of the prizes have never truly been a universal affair. They can't be. What do the committees who offer the Nobel Prizes measure, except a particular (socially skewed) view of scientific achievement? 

Not everyone can consume or pollute at the rate of the US and Western Europe and the number of nuclear bombs discovered, developed and used by the West outweighs the number used by the entire planet. Money talks. Muslims may not have invented nuclear weapons - but when there are other pressing matters, should Muslims put all their energies and focus into winning Nobel Prizes?

Logically speaking, if Muslims do not lead in the inventiveness that creates weapons of mass destructions that devastate the planet, then the flip-side is they don't lead in the responsibility for the overall damage. Dawkins, like many atheists and agnostics falls into a trap of targetting Islam under the impression that their scientific credentials put them above simplistic prejudice. There are agendas dressed up in 'facts' underlying deeper prejudices are masked by pseudo-rationalism.

Read more at Religion Dispatches and the Guardian.

Two-Muslim Theory: Part 2

... continued from previous posting ...

Changing the Narrative

Nawabzada Liaqat Ali Khan was was born in 1895 to a Muslim aristocrat family whose jagir started at the eastern edge of Punjab (now Haryana) and stretched into Uttar Pradesh. His family had cordial relations with the British. His grandfather extended support to the British during the hard times of 1857 and his father earned many titles and honours.

Liaqat Ali went to Aligarh and then to Oxford. On his return from London in 1923, he joined Muslim League. He contested his first elections in 1926 on a seat reserved for Muslims in the UP Assembly (Muzaffarnagar constituency) and comfortably won. He grew into an eloquent parliamentarian, pleading mostly for the causes of Muslim landlords who were a minority in that province.

He became one of the most important members of the Muslim League's vanguard. Nawabzada is, in fact, credited to have convinced a dejected and disappointed Muhammad Ali Jinnah to end his 'self-imposed exile' in London and lead the movement for a separate homeland for Muslims. Liaqat Ali Khan was made the General Secretary of the Muslim League in 1936.

The party's parliamentary committee did not award him the ticket for the 1936 elections for his home constituency which he valued highly. Despite holding a high office in the Muslim League, he contested as an independent from his home constituency and faced criticism of fellow party men.

He contested the 1946 elections for the Central Legislative Assembly on the Muslim seat of Meerut in Uttar Pradesh. Following this victory, Liaqat Ali won a place in the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan and at independence was made the first Prime Minister with the additional charge of Foreign Affairs and Commonwealth Relations and Defense. He remained the longest serving prime minister until Yousuf Raza Gilani exceeded him by a few weeks recently.

Prime Minister Liaqat Ali is accredited with a number of ground breaking contributions. He decided to ally with the US in the Cold War divide; quashed a coup attempt by communists; promoted General Ayub to the highest rank and fought a war with India over Kashmir to name just a select few. His government ruled on ad hoc basis under temporary laws as it could not formulate and build a consensus on a constitution for the country.

Reasons were simple. They could not dig out a monarchy to rule the country nor could they install a Caliph. The constitution had to be based on democracy. But the problem was that Meerut was now in India. The most powerful Prime Minister serving for one of the longest periods in the history of Pakistan had no constituency in the country to contest elections from. A committed democrat and an active parliamentarian, he  knew well that he and his political class had no, or at best a very shaky, future under a democracy. In contrast, Bacha Khan's was a completely secure political position. It was impossible to democratically uproot him from his constituency. He had voters, volunteers and diehard loyalists.

The ad hoc powers were thus used to change the rules of the game. Six months after the death of Muhammad Ali Jinnah, Prime Minister Liaqat Ali Khan moved the Objective Resolution in the Constituent Assembly that introduced Islam as the raison d'être of the new country. Religion was pitched against linguistic and cultural identity and faith was made to rival political interests. Those loving their culture, defending their language and demanding their democratic and political rights on these grounds became heretics conspiring against the last citadel of Islam in the Subcontinent. Ideological boundaries of the country became more important than the limits of electoral constituencies and principles of democracy were contrasted to injunctions of Islam as defined by a selected ulema.

Bacha Khan who enjoyed a hard earned and unflinching popular support in a vast constituency went down in official gazettes as an anti-Pakistan traitor. Red Shirts were hounded and hunted. Politicians were jailed and elections were rigged.

By declaring the entire country as one constituency and setting ones perceived Islamic credentials as the only qualification, Liaqat Ali Khan tried to create a constituency for his class – the politically insecure Muslim elite that had migrated from the Muslim minority provinces of India. But ironically, they could not sustain their hold on this constituency for long. Within a decade they were outdone by the Army in the game they had pioneered. They were declared incapable of defending the citadel of Islam. The army took over the 'responsibility' of keeping the country united in the name of Islam and secure from the conspirators who had strong democratic constituencies in the country.

The army did not feel the need to redraft the national narrative that was scripted in those initial years. It was found to be in perfect harmony with the Army's own scheme to block or cripple democracy and sustain its direct or indirect rule for decades to come. The narrative persists with all its detail and corollaries and insists on its refusal to recognise Bacha Khan as a great national hero.

Two-Muslim Theory: Part 1

Article originally by Tahir Mehdi appeared in the Dawn. Presented here in an adapted format. 

Introducing Bacha Khan

When someone says 'Muslims of Indo-Pak subcontinent' with reference to history, does this refer to one unanimous, monolithic block of people with no shades and diversity? The reality is divergent political interests and ambitions of Muslims throughout the subcontinents history before and beyond the period that ended on this day 65 years ago. A reintroduction to these groups and how the new state of Pakistan responded to their political aspirations might help us understand where we stand now.

Pre-partition Muslims can be classified in many ways beyond sectarian differences within Islam. The followers of one sect are not a completely homologous group either, as they may differ on other counts like economic class, cast, language, culture etc. These attributes have an impact on way people behave and act in spheres of economy, politics, culture and even faith. It's only natural to consider that all these factors make one what he or she is. Instead of labouring over an academically-sound definition of each, this post offers an example of one person from two of these two groups.

Abdul Ghaffar Khan was born in 1890 to rural middle-class Pakhtun parents of Utmanzai, a small town in the present day district of Charssadda. At the age of 20 he opened a school in his village. He had woken up to the fact that his people have no future if they don't educate themselves and their children. The tall, young man proved to be a zealous missionary. He would walk for miles from one village to the other with his simple message – educate yourself and abstain from violence. He was a devout Muslim, a five-timer namazi parhaizgar and would draw heavily from Islamic history and the Prophet's sayings to rally fellow Pakhtuns. People joined him in droves. 

His appeal matured into charisma and in his 30s, he founded a social reform movement named Khudai Khidmatgar (Servants of God). By now he was named Badshah Khan or Bacha Khan. The movemen gave its volunteers a uniform that was red and organised them on the pattern of a militia that was, in his words, armed "with the weapon of the Prophet – that is, patience and righteousness. No power on earth can stand against it." It was only Bacha Khan who could unarm Pakhtuns who otherwise were considered quarrelsome and trigger-happy.

The Red Shirts, as the volunteers of the movement were known as, were against the British rule and demanded self government. For the British, the then province of NWFP had great strategic importance. It was a so-called buffer against the Afghan government that was not friendly with the Raj and also against the Russians whom the British dreaded as their rivals.

The Bolshevik revolution of Russia in 1917 was emerging as a huge challenge for Imperialism. It had a natural affinity with the nations oppressed by the British. The Russian revolution was colored red. The sight of a Red Shirt in the Peshawar valley gave the British a fright. At Qisa Khani Bazar in 1930, the frenzied British forces fired directly at a protest rally of unarmed Khudai Khidmatgars killing many hundreds. The movement and its committed cadre did not budge. They stood fast. Many estimate that at its peak there were as many as a hundred thousand Red Shirts.

When the British adopted a cautious policy of sharing power with local political forces and initiated limited franchise elections, the group allied with Indian National Congress. It contested successive elections, won majority and formed governments in the province. As the British hated them, they would conspire against the Red Shirts and jailed Bacha Khan frequently and for long periods but could not undo the politicisation of the Pakhtun middle class that he had initiated.

Pakhtun felt comfortable with Congress and that didn't bear out of some personal friendship between the top leaders. Congress accommodated politics of budding smaller sub-national groups, offered them space for growth and opportunity to integrate with others without giving much consideration to religion. On the other hand, Bacha Khan did not owe his 'fearlessness' vis a vis Hindus to Pakhtun chivalric traditions, instead he had earned this confidence through successive electoral victories. He had a large constituency where Muslims were in majority. There were Hindus too but Pakhtuns did not see Hindus as threat to their religion or politics.

Despite its vociferous campaign Muslim League could not ignite fears of Hindu domination in the support base of Bacha Khan. His comrades won the land mark elections of 1946 with a thumping majority. He opposed the Partition on the basis of religion, but it happened. His democratically elected government was dismissed 8 days after the independence, on 22 August, 1947 when Muhammad Ali Jinnah was the Governor General and Liaqat Ali Khan was the Prime Minister.

read more in the next posting

Political Disenchantment

A few days back, I came across an article in the Independent newspaper that reported an interesting, if not startling figure. "The public’s disenchantment with Westminster is now so severe senior Conservative figures fear the party’s membership has fallen to 100,000 for the first time in modern politics – a fraction of its three million heyday."

That is especially significant because Tories are still the ruling party, but only just - they were forced to form a coalition which could easily have  kept them out of power. The victors, therefore, were the Lib Dems, and unless there is a resurgence in public participation in the political process, they are likely to be around for a while. Today's political landscape is very bland and the very thin mandate that the present government has highlights a worrying disenchantment that cuts across society. There is nothing but more of the same on the political menu and nothing to separate the choices from one another. In their desperation to appeal to the masses, the political parties have occupied the middle ground and no longer inspire or motivate and the demise of memberships to British party politics only reaffirms our distance.  

Maybe we do not engage because there is no urgency when our bellies are full. Our situations are not the same as those elsewhere. The restiveness witnessed in various parts of the middle east has been an important indicator of a new type of politics. However, can we learn from this?  Perhaps, in time, the social media will override traditional party politics. I certainly hope that the pressure and changes that the social media can bring about continues to grow. This way we can become an instant part of the debate, challenge the current illusion of choice and be politically 'incorrect' if need be. 

Read: I Love Politics, I Hate Politics, It's Complicated by Matthew Paul Turner

اختر مو مبارک شه

اختر مو مبارک شه
لر او بر مو مبارک شه
حساب شی په حاجیانوهم غازیانو روژی مو شه قبولې
دا صبر مو مبارک شه

اختر مو مبارک شه
لر او بر مو مبارک شه
د هوا په لور وچته والوتلي دا د هسکو غرو د پاسه

  لوی وزر مو مبارک شه

اختر مو مبارک شه
لر او بر مو مبارک شه
چی درد پکی لرې په غم د وروڼو داسی زړونه هم

  ځیګر مو مبارک شه

اختر مو مبارک شه
لر او بر مو مبا رک شه
چی کتل په یوه قیسم کړی د وروڼو

داسی سترګی او نظر مو مبارک شه
 

اختر مو مبارک شه
لر او بر مو مبارک شه
لر او بر خو کور د پښتونخوا ده ټول پکی ځای شوی

 دا ټغر مو مبارک شه
 

اختر مو مبارک شه
لر او بر مو مبارک شه
په تاسی چی د زړه مینه راوړی

 داسی زړونه هم بشر مو مبارک شه
 

اختر مو مبارک شه
لر او بر مو مبارک شه
هم د لر او هم د بر شوی

 دا د وصل جوړ بندر مو مبارک شه
 

اختر مو مبارک شه
لر او بر مو مبارک شه
ادیبان او شاعران به تا سره وی

 دا دعلم په میدان کی لوی لښکر مو مبارک شه
 

اختر مو مبارک شه
لر او بر مو مبارک شه
لټون درته سلام او احترام کړی

 ای پښتونه وروره دا خبر مو مبارک شه
 

اختر د مبارک شه
لر او بر د مبارک شه

داود لټون

Martian Anniversary

At 686.98 days, the Martian orbital year is roughly twice the length of the Earth year, so perhaps we can be forgiven for being jubilant early. as it has not been a full Martian year. However, it has been an Earth year since the Mars rover, Curiosity landed on the red planet, and scientific community is abuzz with excitement with what has been gathered so far. The rover has sent back to Earth over 70000 images and has tested rock samples, the presence of water and methane in its bid to discover signs of past life. All indications are that water has existed, but methane (an emission of organic life). Curiosty's findings are seen as the prelude to the much talked about manned colonisation. (I wouldn't mind myself!)

Of course the debates about the billions spent on the project do surface when this kind of attention is paid to the mission. This counter balances the argument and are very valid. After all we still haven't solved the imbalances on this planet - from poverty, to diseases, lack of opportunity and so on. 

Two post from the comments left on the BBC news article about this:

dpr1017 

So theory behind the 'spend more money on education argument'. Spend more money on education, our children grow up to be smart. Maybe they become successful scientists & meet up with other scientists. Since they are smart, they will probably have a sense of curiosity, they will want to learn new things. They might even send something to another planet to learn about that planet. Oh wait...
 
George

To all those decrying the costs of this and other exploratory space missions when millions of humans live in hunger and poverty - perhaps you should send your comments to the governments of India, Pakistan etc. They have staggering amounts of poverty and hunger yet seem well able to afford nuclear weapons and space programmes

Oh yes - we stupidly give big dollops of cash to them as "aid". 

 Read more: Independent, BBC, National Geographic, NASA

Garden Collage

My outgoing phone has been my trusted Samsung Galaxy S. Still works well and very useful when I want to take a snap or two. It is soon to be replaced by a newer version of the Samsung Galaxy S (the Samsung Galaxy S4), though before that, I thought I'd share a few pictures of the garden in full summer bloom. I enjoy the peaceful retreat, the colours, the sound of the birds and sitting at the bistro and watching the rabbits and squirrels. Bliss.

Collage produced using Google Picasa.

Laylat al-Qadr لیلة القدر‎

We have indeed revealed this (Message) in the Night of Power:
And what will explain to thee what the night of power is?
The Night of Power is better than a thousand months.
Therein come down the angels and the Spirit by Allah's permission, on every errand:
Peace!...This until the rise of dawn!
—Sura 97 (Al-Qadr), āyāt 1-5

Read more about Laylut al-Qadr here.

World War Z

I haven't seen the film of the same name, but I understand from the interviews with author, Max Brooks, that the film has had the Hollywood treatment and is very different from the structure of the original narrative, World War Z: An Oral History of the Zombie Wars. That said, provide it is less gory horror, I do like an adventure/thriller flick and a reinterpretation of a story is no bad thing. In fact, Max Brook's book itself is inspired by Stud Terkel's The Good War: An Oral History of World War Two and the zombie films by George A. Romero. Alongside reading the book in ePub format on my iPad and on my Android phone (also available here), I've tried listening to the much celebrated audio (abridged) version of the book (it is there on Youtube). The latter, voiced by actors for the various different parts means that I need to be able to have the time to plug in my headphones whilst being pretty close to an Internet connection, which is something that isn't always a possibility, these days.

Apocalypse

The book, published in 2006, is a written as a series of first hand accounts in a world with a radically reduced population following an outbreak of a virus with Patient Zero in China over runs the Earth turning humans into the living dead. It goes beyond a traditional horror genre and deals with post-apocalyptic chaos brought on by world-wide panic. Fear of the zombie virus spreading uncontrollably and denial of the extent of the spread of the disease is followed quickly by sudden movements of entire populations and societal breakdown. Most governments can offer little in the way of strategy and are unprepared against zombie attacks and the spread of mass infection. The collapse of social order is explored through a series of individual accounts.

In the book, Max Brooks travels the world, and we learn about the individual personal wars and survival stories of the characters that he interviews. Underlying them is the subtext of how we live today - our political and social identities and how humanity can unite when faced with an adversary within. 

Ultimately World War  World War Z is both cautionary as well as hopeful. We are reminded that evil lurks, waiting restlessly to be unleashed when our structures fall apart. It also reminds us that good simmers below the surface, capable of defending and rebuilding a devastated world.

Malala Complex

As an educationalist, it is natural that I should support Malala Yousafzai's right to have an education. This is further reinforced by our common Pashtun heritage. She is also from Swat, so this resonates even deeper. I am genuinely proud to see her stand on a world platform - at the UN General Assembly in New York - and confidently address an international audience. My first reaction? Very impressed. She is one of us and her campaign is a morally justified one. She is a Pashtana. She is a Swati. She is still only young (having turned 16 on July 12th). She is a survivor of one of the most horrendous crimes to have occurred in recent times. She is truly inspirational when it comes to a positive Pashtun image on the international platform. I support this wholeheartedly. Malala is so right when she says: "One child, one teacher, one pen and one book can change the world. Education is the only solution. Education First."

Beyond this, however, it becomes more complex. The doctors and nurses who treated her, are not mentioned and Kainaat and Shazia, who were shot with her have not attracted the same media attention, whilst there are others who are leaching off the 'Malala effect'. The celebs gathering around her, are often simply promoting themselves. Madonna, stripped to her bare skin last year in one of her concerts in solidarity to the girl. The paradox? Malala, like most Pashtanas appears modestly dressed in public. Gordon Brown is not the only politician to have made mileage out of her tragedy. The contradiction? Four years ago, whilst still in Swat, she wanted to be a doctor, not a politician. Sure she was young and politics has a place in bringing about wider change, but it is now much more complex than a case of girl who single handedly took on the Taliban.

As a Pashtun, my first reaction is to want to protect her - not 'smother' her, as could happen in our male-dominated set-up. As an educationalist, I want to take her campaign and make it universal. As an individual, I want her to succeed and grew up to be a contributing member of society. As a political cynic, I wish the politics around her would go away, and this is where I see the difficulty in her campaign. The well-crafted speech that Malala delivered at the UN had many, many merits but the conservative reaction in Pakistan and Afghanistan continues to be part of the challenge. The Taliban still draws sympathy from those who have not benefited from the US presence in Afghanistan and the damaging ripple effect this creates in Pakistan.

They will see personalities - actors, singers, politicians, liberals etc. who will use their own Malala campaigns - as something very alien.  It serves to cloud the cause for universal education - and for the Yousafzai's delegitimizes their position and potentially damage the long-term good. Ziauddin Yousafzai, Malala's father, was - in the end - forced to distance her from her own people and take his family out of Swat. They are now in the hands of outsiders; outsiders with their own agendas.

I hope I am wrong and that the education is not entirely lost to the politics because the cause remains noble. 

Read Malala's Speech in Full.

Ramadhan Kareem

روژه د ټولو نیکمرغه شه
Ramadhan Kareem 
Blessed be this month to all. 

Vindication Part II

... continued from previous post ...

The day before the school received the call that Ofsted were going to be in, I stayed in school - much to my own surprise - until pretty much close to 10pm. I made sure that my copying, printing and planning was done, that my room looked tidy and organised and that my displays were fresh and vibrant. Had I chosen to leave at 3.45pm, I would have been well within my right to do so since I owe the school no more of myself. This has been a difficult year and the school have just about fully absolved themselves of me. Institutions offer little loyalty to the individual. So why did I stay; why did I turn in all my reports, additional paperwork on time, and so on?

I'm not fully sure that I can pinpoint the exact reasons that I continued in the way that I did over the past few months. Professionalism, I guess. Remaining dignified and intact. Not letting the side down. All of those reasons, perhaps. Knowing that if I give positive energy, then those closest to me who receive my positive energy, will at some point give it back to me. Seems reasonable. Mostly, I'd stuck with my duties because it was the moral thing to do.

After the Management Team were briefed by the Inspectors, the headteacher came and sat next to me. She said that the Inspection Team had given my lesson a banding close to the 'Outstanding' category. I repeated that I felt I'd been exonerated thought ultimately I refuse to be enslaved to the opinions of those who like/don't like me personally. I'm not easily flattered and conversely, I refuse to be put down. Perhaps in saying so created an awkward moment for the head. I got the closest I would to hearing an apology and the past couple of days has been an attempt, I sense at damage repair.

The onus is on me to forgive and accept a type of rapprochement. Of course, it will never be publicly seen as a matter of apology and forgiveness - there are too many egos at stake, but for me it will never be the same. The politics within education is enough to turn one off. That sense of having been wronged will clearly now affect the decisions that I now make.

*for another view on school inspections read this

Vindication Part I

An Inspector Calls ... (Again)*

So there I was, sitting in the meeting with the Ofsted Inspector. He shuffled through his notes and as he did so, he said, "I'm going to say it as it is." He had written lots during the observation some hours earlier. My mind was prepared for any possibility, especially given recent events. The Inspector lifted his head and looked towards me. As I have said, just lately events have left me with mixed feelings. As it stands work has not been easy. Although I have been impeccably strong and focussed and I have managed to gain the respect of my colleague I will find myself at a crossroads in life, yet again attempting to manage the criticisms of others whilst avoiding falling into another year of financial deficit. I have put my trust in Allah and soldiered on. I have endured a year of this type of testing, but I am human and the private worries that so far I have kept entirely to myself, are beginning to surface. 

The Inspector continued, "You were Good. There was maximum learning and engagement in your class, a clear learning focus, excellent challenge and questioning. Your objectives were clear and you revisited them; you explained the success criteria and there was clear progression made throughout the lesson. You scaffolded learning very well. You had very good understanding of the subject. You built in clear next steps and your relationships with the children were excellent. I saw clear directions and full involvement. This was a very good lesson."

This was all rather surreal, I admit and whilst the Inspector spoke, I suddenly found myself reflecting on the conversation I'd had just some weeks before following an overcomplicated and unsuccessful re-interview. The five-stage process was to secure an extension on my existing contract. I am speaking here of a regular class teacher position - not some elevated position in leadership. The short version of what happened meant that I was left with a feeble excuse around being expensive to hire due to my experience. My panel interview, apparently had been the 'best' they'd 'ever had' however the school aimed towards attracting a new cheaper generation of good to outstanding teachers.

Strange indeed, but how this decision was arrived at has been rather complex. Throughout the first year in her position, the headteacher has remained under the influence of a rather dreadful School Improvement Officer. The latter who no doubt cuts a rather fetching fee for her 'advice', earlier on in the year had made a judgement about me. She was proved wrong following the Ofsted Inspection. Her awkwardness; not mine. I'm a rare visitor to the staff lounge, but today I went in and she evidently blanked me completely despite my attempts to join a wider conversation. I'm knowledgeable enough to recognise embarrassment in others and I'm tactful enough to not draw attention to it, though I have the right to not forget so easily.

The School Improvement Officer, I do not care about though quite honestly, I feel strongly that the headteacher and her deputy, had let me down. Remember, up until now, I had remained calm, courteous and did not react. I didn't engage with any negative conversations about the situation I'd been dropped in. The Inspector's assessment, however, had the potential to change this significantly.

*for another view on school inspections read this

A Hundred Types of Prayer

 صد گونه نماز

امروز چو هر روز خرابیم خراب

مگشا در اندیشه  و برگیر رباب

صد گونه نماز است رکوع است و سجود

آن را که جمال دوست باشد محراب

 Today, like every day, we are ruined, ruined.
Don't open the door of worry, but take up the rubâb,
There are a hundred kinds of prayer, bowing, and prostration
It is the beauty, dear friend, of the mehrab

Maulana Rumi

Image: zawaj.com

Murder and Apology

In the hysteria and media vulturism that has surrounded the murder of Lee Rigby, I still feel that this post comes too soon. The family of the dead soldier needs time to grieve, the space to support each other and to make sense of the situation. The media is not as forgiving however and sensationalism grabs the headlines. Much as I try to resist being drawn in, eventually I feel that I should also voice a comment.

I'm at odds with the media adopting extreme views, but I'm also at odds with jumping on the bandwagon of apology or justification. These are not appropriate responses. Lee Rigby was murdered in cold blood, in a most gratuitous and savage manner by assailants who had somehow been dehumanised. That act of absolute unashamed brutality, the immediate events leading up to it and the delayed response of the authorities should be under the media and investigative microscope. For the same reasons, I made a decision not to comment on the Boston attacks the Woolwich murder has led to Muslims being rolled out onto the social media platform to apologise or distance themselves from acts of terror (murder). This is a type of approval seeking and constant apology is something that I do wish to entertain. Frankly, I sense inferiority when this has to happen and I'm bored with it. Murder of someone innocent is murder. It is heinous and it deserves a just punishment. That is true if some white Norwegian is behind this or some deranged  men on the streets of London are behind this. Individual acts like this simply do not represent all the members of a society. It creates an unnecessary pressure to be apologetic. Would we also call it murder if the innocent are killed by soldiers in combat? That perhaps is a rhetorical question, though it is one I could come back to in a future post. Right now, this apology by the BBC's Nick Robinson - where the killers in the Woolwich murders were described as having a 'Muslim appearance' - has the sad potential to be almost comic.

Read Areeb Ullah's take on this.

Image Source: Real Street

Pakistan: Vote for Change?

At the point of writing, there are few surprises following the election in Pakistan. The process has been marred by violence, and the sad deaths of dozens. There have been allegations of coercion, vote rigging and polling stations closing early or not allowing people to cast their vote. For Pakistan though, the election presents something of a democratic milestone. For the first time since the country was founded in 1947, the outgoing government was the first civilian government to have lasted its term without dismissal or a military coup. This is an achievement, no less, though even at this point, whilst some votes are being counted, the people seem to have made their choice. 

Out goes the PPP (Pakistan People's Party), and in comes the PML-N (Pakistan Muslim League, Nawaz Sharif). This is the usual passing of the baton between the ruling parties. The dauphin, stealthily waiting in the wings was of course, Imran Khan, ex-cricketer and  leader of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaaf (the Justice Party). His campaign trail invited the attention of the media and caught the attention of Pakistan's youth (46% of whom are aged between 18 and 29). In the Pashtun heartlands, in particular Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, the provincial government led by the ANP (Awaami National Party) has been voted out and replaced by the Tehreek-e-Insaaf. Both Pakhtunkhwa and Baluchistan's assembly will be made up of a mix of parties, but in south, PKMAP (Pakhtunkhwa Milli Awaami Party) are set to take the larger portion of seats.

So what does this all mean? Well it means, that whilst this election was fought on the ticket of change, some things will remain remarkably the same. Nawaz Sharif is set to return as Prime Minister - despite being dismissed twice, jailed and exhiled, for, amongst other things, corruption and mismanagement. His clear rival, on the home patch was Imran Khan who at least at the urban youth level, had the potential to split the PML vote. This has largely not affected the result in the Punjab which has traditionally been safe PML territory. Sindhis in Pakistan will vote along tribal and ethnic lines and the MQM in Karachi will pick up the Urdu-speaking/Mohajir vote. In short, not much has changed.

The change of personnel, will be seen mostly in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa where the nationalist ANP could not capture the mood of its traditional support base. That has gone to the Tehreek-e-Insaaf and really should be the talk of the election. The question is why and to understand what is deliverable. The ousted Awaami National Party claims the inheritence of Bacha Khan's legacy - nationalist, focussed on Pashtun issues, traditionally pro-Afghanistan and non-antagonistic towards India. The Tehreek-e-Insaaf is less clear about the latter issues, but has made a ticket of opposing one of the main issues of the present time - that of unmanned drones, said to target the militants along the Af-Pak border, but often making ordinary civilians the victims. This is one of the key points of appeal, and that of Imran Khan's rock-star-like persona which appeals to a young voting public, keen on change. Beyond this, it is difficult to determine what else seperates the PTI from PML. Ideologically there is considerable shared common ground and therefore arguably, despite the different guises and the recent banter between their respective leaderships, politically speaking they appear to offer more of the same. A key common ground between the PTI and the PML is their relationships with the ISI (Pakistan's notorious intellignce agency) and a conservative affliation with the Taliban.

The 2014 NATO/US withdrawal in Afghanistan is set to create a number of possible scenarios. One of those may be a resurgent Taliban. How, the new central power in Pakistan, and the new provincial power in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa's percieved appeasement of the Taliban plays out is yet to be seen. My vote, however, rests with the people. Pashtuns are a conservative folk - I live with that. But they are remarkably open, accomodating and egalitarian. Contrast this with the rest of Pakistan which voted largely on tribal, traditional or ethnic lines. It this Pashtun notion of fair play that has returned a PTI victory in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. We're willing to give the promisers at PTI central, their chance. 

What I would like to see, is not just the stopping of drones, but genuine economic and social prosperity for the Pashtuns, lifting of educational standards and moves towards recognition of our history and language. Pashtuns have been used as cannon fodder in someone else's war for long enough. Outwardly, unless the PTI or PML can change the outlook of the army or the ISI, I am not sure how this can change for Pashtuns either in Pakistan or Afghanistan. Right now, we watch and wait to see what will follow.

Political Alternatives

In a democracy versus a dictatorship scenario, I am of course, a democrat. That said, having lived in the Arabian Gulf for several years, I can see the advantages of benevolent monarchies. Though they are essentially absolute powers, oil wealth has been used to bring massive transformations in the lives of ordinary citizens, many of who a generation ago did not have electricity, health care, and other basic services we take for granted. Under these systems of governance, populations may not express even mild political points for many reasons. Fear might be one, but a genuine distancing of the population from politics might be another. Contrast that with other places. Provided that the dollars/dinars/dhirhams roll in, I can see why many folk are politically mute and more than happy to go about their lives (and privileges) in a kind of political vacuum. Money can buy contentment, and perhaps even importantly, a kind of docile silence.

For some time now, I've drifted away from hardcore politics and too much reliance on the promises made by politicians. As a result I find that I haven't voted for several years, and not because I am unconcerned about the world. On the contrary, I care about many issues around me and if I lived in a part of the world where civic duty/citizenry was directly linked to partaking in the political process, then perhaps I might be compelled to cast a choice at the ballot box. Potentially I am open to some level of political discourse, but I guess I need convincing as I remodel my own, multi-layered, political identity and if I appear to have fallen off the political spectrum and I do not get a voting card, then I am not greatly affected. For now, my general approach is to keep the media at arms length and my involvement in daily politics at an even greater distance.

That level of cynicism perhaps comes across as a contradiction for someone who is essentially a democrat. It is not that I do not have some very strong opinions on matters of religion, finance, education and society - all of which could be expressed politically. This blog is testimony to the many issues I am passionate about. The problem with politics, in my view, starts with politicians. I have very little respect for the manipulation and lack of integrity that has become symbiotic with politics. Add to that a blurring of political ideologies in a modern age, so that what is on offer is simply more of the same. I tend to turn my back on things like that because voter choice is, in actuality, an illusion.

I quote:

Freedom is a state of mind and playing the part of the frustrated anti-authoritarian has become way too old for me. Karl Hess once said, “Radical and revolutionary movements seek not to revise but to revoke. The target of revocation should be obvious. The target is politics itself.” I can think of no simpler way to revoke politics than to actively purge its importance from my life.

Jeffrey Tucker recently quipped, “A mind is a terrible thing to waste on politics.” So here I leave you with a challenge: unsubscribed everyone that posts political things on Facebook, refuse to watch the news, avoid social media generally, always change the subject away from politics, and always make sure to notice the how beautiful the flowers are. Take a holiday away from politics and see where it takes you.

Sound advice.

Quote taken from Students For Liberty.

Iron Lady

 

 Photo: AP

A rather eccentric teacher once posed the question that lives on in my mind: "What is it be to be young, from an ethnic minority and growing up in Thatcher's Britain?" I can't quite remember the answer, but what I do recall is that it was a gritty, rather detached and pessimistic time if you belonged to the demographic in the question. Margaret Thatcher is dead; governments and prime ministers have come and gone, but the social changes she started, live on. We live in an altogether more individualistic, ego-centric, and less compassionate world as a result of Thatcherism. Iron Lady she may have been styled, but cold and driven by hubris is how she appeared. There is nothing wrong in reaching out to those less fortunate than you and not everything is about making money and she sorely missed these points. I have to say, she will not be missed by me and quite clearly according to some, I am breaking a general taboo: never speak ill of the departed. The social media is abuzz with negative opinions; there is much more I could say, but for now I will leave that to others:

BREAKING: Wicked Witch dies, funeral procession to follow yellow brick road. huff.to/1487Mwv
— HuffPost UK Comedy (@HuffPostUKCom) April 9, 2013