Saturday, July 11, 2020




FAIZ, INDIA AND PROTEST



Faiz’s ‘Hum Dekhenge’ has continued to inspire activists for decades. Why do the leftist poet’s words continue to resonate today?
Published Jul 05, 2020
From Iqbal Bano singing it to a charged crowd in Lahore in 1986, to students reciting its verses on campus protests across India late last year, Faiz Ahmed Faiz’s ‘Hum Dekhenge’ has continued to inspire activists for decades. Why do the leftist poet’s words continue to resonate beyond their original context?


Header illustration by Samiah Bilal


On December 17, 2019, a student protest at the Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur (IIT-K) was held in solidarity with students at Delhi’s Jamia Millia Islamia who had been brutally attacked by police on December 15. The protest included a recitation of an Urdu poem, commonly known as Hum Dekhenge (literally, ‘We Shall See’), by leftist poet and revolutionary Faiz Ahmed Faiz (1911-1984). In a video posted on Twitter, a student recites the poem, which he reads from his cell phone, to a crowd of listeners, some of whom mill about and some of whom listen attentively, with the crowd applauding at certain lines. This recitation of the poem soon became the centre of a controversy, when a post-doctoral faculty member at IIT lodged a complaint against the poem and its performance, claiming that its lines aroused communal sentiment. IIT-K responded by establishing a committee to investigate the complaint. A public debate in the media ensued, as prominent poets, a former Indian Supreme Court judge, and journalists and intellectuals discussed the poem and its meaning.
The use of Faiz’s ‘Hum Dekhenge’ in the anti-CAA protests also illuminates the direct link between Urdu poetry and the idea of art as action, which became a clarion call in the 1930s.
First composed in 1979, Faiz’s ‘Hum Dekhenge’ has become a rallying cry for protests both throughout India and around the world against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), passed by India’s Parliament on December 19, 2019. The CAA proposes a religious basis for citizenship for refugees who have entered India from the neighbouring countries of Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Bangladesh. Under the new amendment, refugees who are Hindu, Jain, Christian, Sikh, Buddhist or Parsi, even if they do not possess identification papers, may receive Indian citizenship within six years. Notably missing from this list are Muslims, who, according to the 2011 Census of India, make up 14.2 percent of the population, for a total of 172 million people. According to a more recent estimate, India’s Muslims, at 195 million people in 2020, comprise the third-largest Muslim population in the world, after Indonesia and Pakistan.

Protesters at an anti-CAA demonstration in India | Siasat Daily
Protesters at an anti-CAA demonstration in India | Siasat Daily

The spectre of citizenship being granted on the basis of identification papers — which are notoriously difficult to obtain in South Asia, especially for the poor — is particularly scary. It elides the history of mass migration and the large-scale passage of refugees across the border during the 1947 Partition and the 1971 war that led to the creation of Bangladesh. The CAA represents a fundamental reworking of the citizen’s relationship to the nation-state in South Asia. It moves from citizenship based on residence within India to citizenship based on religion.
While the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)’s move has roots in the last 70 years, particularly in Assam — where the idea of a National Register of Citizens (NRC) was formed — the CAA and the threat of a nation-wide NRC, which has been promised by the government, alongside the recent annexation of Kashmir (with the abrogation of Article 370 on August 5, 2019) and other policies and Supreme Court verdicts, make this a turning-point.

URDU AND PROTEST POETRY

Urdu poetry has been central to the protests. The use of ‘Hum Dekhenge,’ as rallying cry, song, visual art, and internet meme, speaks to the widespread citation and circulation of certain Urdu or Hindi/Urdu poems during the anti-CAA protests. ‘Hum Dekhenge’ has been extensively recited or sung during the protests.
In a rendition posted on YouTube on December 29, 2019, the poem is sung on the steps of the Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) campus, which on January 5 saw violence against students and faculty by an armed mob. In an anti-CAA protest in Cape Town, South Africa, a woman named Kathyayini Dash stood outside the Indian consulate, microphone in hand, passionately singing the poem. The poem has also inspired visual artists.
On January 13, 2020, a group of art students installed an artists’ protest at Shaheen Bagh in Delhi, the site of a 24-hour-a-day sit-in that lasted from January to March 2020 and celebrated as a women-led protest. The artists wrote lines from ‘Hum Dekhenge’ on to sheets of paper, folded them into boats, and laid them out in the shape of a heart, with the text of the poem placed at the base. The text is accompanied by a toy tank, whose size, an artist explained in an interview given to The Quint, was meant to show the military’s small power when compared to that of poetry.
Other poems popular among protesters are Habib Jalib’s (1928-1993) ‘Dastur’ (The Constitution), originally composed in opposition to Pakistan’s 1962 Constitution instituted by General Ayub Khan, and Faiz’s ‘Bol’, published in his 1942 collection Naqsh-i-Faryadi, which exhorts the listener to “Speak, for your lips are still free.” Thus poetry transcends its original time and contexts.
The connection between Hindi/Urdu poetry and Bollywood cinema, begun in the 1940s and 1950s, is evidenced by two widely-cited poems by Bollywood lyricists Rahat Indori and Varun Grover. ‘Hum Dekhenge’ has also been translated into other languages including Bhojpuri and Kannada, and sung in demonstrations. The circulation of these poems illustrates the nexus between Hindi/Urdu poetry, cinema, song, and protest in South Asia.
The use of Faiz’s ‘Hum Dekhenge’ in the anti-CAA protests also illuminates the direct link between Urdu poetry and the idea of art as action, which became a clarion call in the 1930s. As the Hindi-Urdu writer Premchand (1880-1936) declared in the inaugural address to the first Progressive Writers’ Conference in 1936, “As long as the aim of literature was only to provide entertainment, to put us to sleep … it had no need of action. … The only literature that will pass our test is that … which instils in us dynamism and restlessness, not sleep” (cited in Orsini, The Oxford India Premchand, 2004).
The formation of the All-India Progressive Writers’ Association (Aipwa) in 1936, with which Faiz was affiliated, marked a turning-point for modern art and literature in the Indian subcontinent. Premised on the rejection of cultural conservatism and tradition, as well as on the idea of art as awakening the masses toward political action, the Progressive Writers’ Movement rewrote the relationship of art to politics. Among Hindi/Urdu writers, it harnessed the production of poetry and prose to political and social revolution. Faiz himself was imprisoned twice (1951-1955, then for over 5 months in 1958-1959) for his support of leftist politics in Pakistan, while other writers associated with the movement were charged with obscenity and forced to defend themselves in court in both India and Pakistan.

TEXTUAL AND PERFORMANCE HISTORY

Despite the poem’s wide circulation, ‘Hum Dekhenge’’s textual and performance history is not well known. ‘Hum Dekhenge’ was first published in Faiz’s 1980 collection of poems, Mere Dil Mere Musafir (My Heart, My Traveller), composed toward the end of his life. This collection illustrates Faiz’s leftist internationalist stance, informed by his experiences with both the Progressive Writers’ Movement and the political turmoil of Pakistan’s early years. After the military dictator Ziaul Haq’s rise to power, Faiz was targeted and put under surveillance for his support of the Pakistan Peoples Party, which led him to leave Pakistan. He spent several years outside Pakistan, living mostly in Beirut, where he worked on a small salary as the editor of Lotus, the journal of the Afro-Asian Writers Association (active from 1958 to 1979). During his time in Beirut, Faiz witnessed the suffering of Palestinians in Lebanon and abroad.
Mere Dil Mere Musafir includes poems on the suffering of Palestinians, as does his next collection Ghubar-i-Ayyam, which his grandson Ali Madeeh Hashmi argues should be considered as an appendix to Mere Dil Mere Musafir (Hashmi, Love and Revolution: Faiz Ahmed Faiz, The Authorized Biography, 2016: 255).
During this time, Faiz also visited London, Moscow, and the United States. ‘Hum Dekhenge’ is labelled, “America, January 1979,” though it is not clear where in America he composed the poem.
After first being published, the poem suffered an unusual textual history. Faiz removed ‘Hum Dekhenge’ from his collected works, Nuskha Haye Vafa published in 1984 by Maktaba-i-Karvan in Lahore. The reasons for this omission are unclear. According to one source, Maktaba-i-Karvan asked for the poem to be removed because of its religious imagery (Andy McCord, “Re: URDULIST: Faiz – hum dekhenge,” Email to Urdulist, January 9, 2020).
Another possible explanation is that the poem is too similar to another tarana in the collection. That poem, titled “A Song for the Mujahideen of Palestine,” remains in Nuskha Haye Vafa. Its first two lines, “Hum jeetengey/Haqqa hum ik din jeetengey,” mirror very closely the first two lines of ‘Hum Dekhenge,’ and so it is possible that because of the poems’ similarity Faiz removed ‘Hum Dekhenge.’
How, then, did the poem survive? Its popularity is in large part the result of a famous performance by the Pakistani singer Iqbal Bano. Bano sang ‘Hum Dekhenge’ on February 13, 1986, at the annual Faiz Mela. This festival is held in February on Faiz’s birthday to commemorate his life and work. The day’s festivities would be followed in the evening by a concert at the Alhamra Arts Council, on Lahore’s Mall Road.

An artist installation at Shaheen Bagh, featuring *Hum Dekhenge* | Photo by @delhi6wala, posted on Instagram, January 30, 2020
An artist installation at Shaheen Bagh, featuring Hum Dekhenge | Photo by @delhi6wala, posted on Instagram, January 30, 2020

Bano was a well-known interpreter of Faiz’s poetry, and that year’s concert had attracted an unusually large crowd. According to Hashmi, “a large number of political activists and workers” had gathered outside the auditorium, demanding to be let in. Hashmi’s mother Moneeza “told the assembled audience that she was going to open the doors and people could sit wherever they could find a seat.” Soon people were sitting “on the stairs, the floors, wherever they could find some space.” As Hashmi recalls, of Faiz’s poems “the loudest cheers were reserved for ‘Hum Dekhenge’,” and within that poem, for the verses “sab taaj uchhalay jaaengey/sab takht giraaey jaaengey.” Bano was begged to perform the song again as an encore, and this performance was recorded by a technician at Alhamra. The performance’s subversive nature was immediately recognised by the authorities, who, “raided the homes of the organisers and many of the participants looking for any audio copies of the concert, especially ‘Hum Dekhenge.’ Many copies were confiscated and destroyed but my uncle Shoaib Hashmi had managed to get a hold of one copy, and anticipating the crackdown, handed it over to some friends who promptly smuggled it out to Dubai, where it was copied and widely distributed.”
Fortunately, this recording has survived and is available on YouTube. The audience’s reaction to the performance is raucous, with the crowd bursting into applause as soon as Bano starts singing the poem. The audience members clap along with the rhythm, applaud certain lines, and at some points, totally erupt. When Bano reaches the poem’s most directly anti-authoritarian lines, the crowd goes wild, crying out and yelling, and then breaking into rhythmic applause, which the tabla player echoes for a few measures. When Bano begins to resume, the audience breaks into cheers of “Inquilaab Zindabad” (Long Live the Revolution) — a leftist slogan now used broadly across protest groups in South Asia — which they continue to chant as she sings several more lines. This reaction is a testament to the power of this poem to incite revolutionary emotion. We can probably credit Bano’s performance with ‘Hum Dekhenge’’s enshrinement in the corpus of protest poetry.

RELATIONSHIP TO SUFI AND QURANIC IMAGERY

‘Hum Dekhenge’’s use of religious imagery has been at the centre of India’s controversy around the poem. What is not well known about the poem is that, despite Faiz’s leftist credentials, ‘Hum Dekhenge’ draws on Quranic imagery and hinges on a core Sufi belief. While known popularly by its refrain ‘Hum Dekhenge,’ the poem as originally published in Mere Dil Mere Musafir carries three words from the Quran as its title. These are: “Va Yabqā Vajhu Rabbika,” from Verse 27 of the 55th surah of the Quran, Ar-Rahmān. Translated as “the face of your Lord” in the Al-Azhar University-approved translation by Majid Fakhry (An Interpretation of the Qur’an: English Translation of the Meanings, A Bilingual Edition, 2004), these three words present a central image in Sufi thought. The verse presents the face as all that remains after everything on earth is destroyed. As has been pointed out by others, this is an eschatological image, but it uses an established dichotomy in Sufi thought: between baqā, that which remains, and fanā, the effacement of the ego in the divine. The previous verse (Verse 26) states, “Everything upon her [the earth, or the soul, both feminine nouns] is effaced,” followed by Verse 27, “But the Face of your Lord, full of majesty and nobility, shall remain.” Verse 26 is eschatological, pointing to the final day of judgment, but Verse 27 presents the destruction of all in a Sufi context, where it is only the face of God that remains.
Other images are best understood through reference to Quranic imagery. The poem’s third and fourth lines refer to “That day that was promised/that was written on the tablet of eternity (lauh-i-azal).” The lauh-i-azal refers to the celestial eternal table (al-lauh al-mahfūz) from which all knowledge is derived, including the Quran (Wensinck and Bosworth, “Law,” Encyclopaedia of Islam; Alexander, “The Guarded Tablet,” Metropolitan Museum Journal, 1989: 199-207; Halepota, “The Holy Qur’ān as the Book ‘Umm-ul-Kītāb,’” Islamic Studies, 1983: 1-15).
The next two lines also reference a Quranic image: “Jab zulm o sitam ke koh-i-giraan/Ru’i ki tarha urr jaaengey” (When heavy mountains of tyranny and oppression/Will float away like cotton). The image of mountains becoming as light and fluffy as cotton is found in Surah 101, Al-Qari’ah, which describes the day of judgment as: “The Day that men shall be like scattered butterflies;/And the mountains like tufted wool,”(trans. Fakhry, An Interpretation of the Qur’an: English Translation of the Meanings, A Bilingual Edition, 2004) where the last words of Verse 5 can be translated more literally as “wool that has been fluffed up” (I am grateful to Prof Hamza Zafer for help with this translation). Faiz’s verse draws on this central opposition, where solid mountains suddenly become light and ephemeral like wool or cotton.
‘Hum Dekhenge’’s use of religious imagery has been at the centre of India’s controversy around the poem. What is not well known about the poem is that, despite Faiz’s leftist credentials, ‘Hum Dekhenge’ draws on Quranic imagery and hinges on a core Sufi belief.
Most notably, the poem invokes the Persian Sufi Mansur Al-Hallaj’s famous exclamation, “An ul-Haq,” translatable as “I am God” but also “I am Truth”, by which Hallaj expressed the obliteration of man’s ego in the divine. This radical stance, which led to al-Hallaj’s execution in the 9th century, has led to confusion in the media and even among protestors themselves. As reported by Harish Trivedi, Professor of English at the University of Delhi, “there’s a joke going round that a student singing the song in a protest procession was stopped and asked by a reporter if he knew what he was singing. ‘So what is An ul-Haq?’ asked the reporter. The student said, ‘An ul-Haq … An ul-Haq?… Brother of Zia ul Haq?’” By citing this phrase, Faiz’s poem both references the Sufi critique of religious (and other) authority and invokes a fundamentally mystical way of perceiving and understanding God. This was meant as a criticism of Ziaul Haq’s government, which imposed Sharia-inspired religious laws (known as Hudood) on the country, but the critique can easily be transposed on to any human or political authority that takes away or threatens humanity’s fundamental relationship with God.

TRANSLATING FAIZ


White Star Archives
White Star Archives

The difficulties of translating Faiz — and Urdu poetry in general — have been noted by scholars and translators. In particular, Faiz’s poetry’s deep imbrication within a web of established images and metaphors, drawn from the Urdu and Indo-Persian poetic traditions, presents challenges. According to Victor Kiernan, Faiz’s major translator, “Of all elements in foreign poetry, imagery is the easiest to appreciate, except when, as often in the Persian-Urdu tradition, it has symbolic and shifting meanings” (cited in Ali, “Introduction—The Rebel’s Silhouette: Translating Faiz Ahmed Faiz,” Daybreak: Writings on Faiz, 2013: 177-178). As Naomi Lazard, an American poet who worked with Faiz on her transcreations of his poems, noted about her process: “I asked him questions regarding the text. Why did he choose just that phrase, that word, that image, that metaphor? What did it mean to him? … What was crystal clear to an Urdu-speaking reader meant nothing at all to an American” (Ibid., 178). As I have argued elsewhere, Faiz’s poetry draws on the resources of tradition to invert them to new, and sometimes political, purposes. Part of what makes his poetry so fresh and quotable — and well-suited to political protest — is its multi-valence; its deep debt to, and reimagining of, the Urdu poetic topos.
To bring the impact of ‘Hum Dekhenge’ to an English-speaking audience, I had to consider these various factors. How is one to transmit the dense networks of meaning underlying Faiz’s poem, and to render them in a form that communicates the poem’s rousing effect, its quotability, its rhetorical impact on the listener? I have made my best attempt below. I chose to substitute ‘Hum Dekhenge,’ which means “We shall see,” with “On that day” or similar phrases, because the finality of the future tense in the Urdu is what makes that line so powerful. This grammatical distinction is not clear in English. But what the Urdu phrase points to is the certainty that the day that has been promised will, indeed, arrive. I do not believe that sense is rendered in “We shall see”, but other translators are welcome to make their own decisions.
On That Day
That day will come
Yes, that day will come
That day we have been promised
When mountains of tyranny and oppression
will float away like cotton
And the earth will tremble and shake
under the feet of the oppressed
The sky will thunder and roar
on the heads of the arbitrators
False idols will be uprooted
from the Ka’ba of God’s earth
And we, the pure-hearted, those banished from the sanctuary, will be seated in places of honour
Thrones will be smashed
And crowns overthrown
On that day
Only the name of God shall remain
Who is both present and unseen
Who is both the observer and the perceived
On that day
The cry of “I am God!” will resound
The God that is in you and me
And the earth shall be ruled by those whom God created
The people, who are you and me
— America, January 1979

***

On February 23, 2020, mob violence broke out in parts of northeast Delhi, sparked by a speech in which a BJP leader, Kapil Mishra, issued an ultimatum to Delhi police to clear the road of Chand Bagh, in northeast Delhi, of anti-CAA protesters within three days, or risk violence. Violence ensued, as armed mobs barged into neighbourhoods, attacking Muslim men and shops, setting cars and e-rickshaws ablaze, throwing stones and, according to a recent estimate by the Delhi Police, vandalising eight mosques, two temples, one madrassah and one shrine (dargah). Police reportedly stood by, or joined in.
On my Twitter feed, someone cited another Faiz poem, this time his 1974 ‘Dhaka Se Vaapsi Par,’ composed as he returned from Dhaka with Zulfikar Ali Bhutto as part of his work with the Pakistan National Council for the Arts. The poem becomes a kind of shorthand: a way of extending sympathy and solidarity not only to the residents of northeast Delhi, where Hindu and Muslim neighbourhoods are being torn apart, but also to the estranged neighbours from the formerly East and West Pakistan.
“We have become strangers,” the poem begins, “after so many meetings/When will we become confidants again?” And so, threads of intimacy and estrangement, trauma and longing, across local neighbourhoods and national borders, are woven together into a web of suffering and loss. It is not surprising that this poem by Faiz who, along with his progressive contemporaries, imagined alternative futures for the peoples of both India and Pakistan, can serve as metonym for the pain and suffering of the present day.
Faiz and his fellow members of the Progressive Writers’ Movement stressed the universality of the human condition, as against the divisions of caste, class, language, region, religion and nation. Faiz’s third-world internationalist stance, evident in the poems in Mere Dil Mere Musafir, envisions a global community organised around shared solidarities. In ‘Hum Dekhenge,’ Faiz draws on the resources of Urdu poetry, including its Sufi and Quranic imageries, to invoke and create this common sense of suffering and hope.

A version of this piece was originally published in Positions: Asia critique

The writer is Associate Professor of Urdu at the University of Washington, and the author of Cosmopolitan Dreams: The Making of Modern Urdu Literary Culture in Colonial South Asia
Published in Dawn, EOS, July 5th, 2020
Making regulation more democratic

Between sugar and digital technology, the regulatory culture in Pakistan is such that hand-outs are offered to uncompetitive sectors whereas infant industries remain mired in red tape.


Abdullah Zaidi Updated Jul 06 2020
PAKISTAN

“THERE is nothing magic about regulations. Too much is bad, too little is bad,” said Hillary Clinton in one of her talks at Goldman Sachs.

On one hand, overregulation deters economic activity. But on the other, unchecked deregulation leads to grotesque levels of inequality. Good regulation, however, is correlated with foreign direct investment (FDI). It is also negatively correlated with income inequality. Owing to the economy’s dire condition, the PTI government is forced to operate within a narrow fiscal and monetary space. This leaves regulation as the only viable lever for kick-starting growth. Unfortunately, our existing regulatory structure at both federal and provincial levels enables the very market failures it is supposed to preclude.

Take the example of the sugar industry. The government treats sugar as an essential food item with the supposed objective of protecting the farmer and consumers’ interest. This translates into government intervention across the supply chain starting from the grower and ending with the retailer. It stands to reason that if an industry is overregulated, it will develop direct links with policymakers. Our sugar sector is a grotesque manifestation of this phenomenon as top-tier politicians own or co-own mills, which control 50 per cent of the entire sugar market.


Policymakers can encourage the enforcement of regulatory laws by incentivising the private right of action through courts

The recent crisis ensued because the Sugar Advisory Board — a high-level body that monitors the national stock — failed to ban the export of sugar even when it had information that stocks were depleting and local prices increasing. The board consists of government officials and representatives from the Pakistan Sugar Mills Association (PSMA) and growers’ associations. No member from civil society organisations or a government body like the Consumer Protection Council sits on the board. The purported reason for their exclusion is the belief that bureaucrats are perfect guardians of public interest. One consequence of the bureaucratic incapacity is the poor recovery rate of sugar.

On the flip side of sugar is digital technology. It was fascinating to witness the botched attempt by the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (Pemra) to regulate online content producers (web TV or over-the-top TV) by suggesting an expensive licensing regime, which creates steep barriers to entry. If the architects of the suggested regulations understood the industry at all, they would be talking about extending infant industry protections instead of generating revenue through a costly licensing regime — not to mention the serious implications the proposed regulations had for freedom of speech.

Between sugar and digital technology, the regulatory culture in Pakistan is such that hand-outs are offered to uncompetitive sectors whereas infant industries remain mired in red tape. Needless to say, the opposite should be happening. While the final solution will involve a bureaucratic overhaul, which is beyond the scope of this piece, there are other effective and short-term routes to better regulation that have been employed by many countries. One is tripartism: the practice of giving public interest groups (PIGs) a seat at the table, preferably the driving seat.

The need for regulating a particular sector arises because the government wants to maximise societal well-being by reining in market forces. Thus, those directly affected by the said sector should be at the centre of the regulatory effort. PIGs may include trade unions, professional associations, consumer rights bodies, community-based organisations and others that ultimately bear the brunt.

For instance, under a triparty arrangement, occupational health and safety regulations will play out in a way that the safety inspector (regulator) will carry out factory inspections with the company safety officer (private sector) and an elected union health and safety representative (PIG). The union representative will be a part of all communications between the regulator and the company. In some cases, they will have the same standing as the regulator to enforce a particular action, such as shutting down an unsafe machine. Many Australian states have written their regulations on the same model.

To some degree, regulators in Pakistan already accommodate PIGs. All regulatory authorities have governing boards or oversight/steering committees, which have representation of experts and the private sector. But in most cases, these PIGs are under-represented or are in no position to influence the policy of these authorities.

The Drug Regulatory Authority of Pakistan has a policy board where bureaucrats and experts are in a ratio of 9:6 whereas the board chairman is a government official.

A more interesting example is of building control and town planning – a high-stakes government function involving the oversight of the construction industry. In a first, the Punjab government appointed the Lahore Development Authority’s vice chairman from the private sector in late 2018. However, it has no meaningful representation from civil society despite its direct implications for Lahore’s urban planning. In fact, it can be argued that civil society representation is even more critical to offset the representation of private-sector property developers in the body. It is worth mentioning that Pakistanis have more faith in civil society than they have in the government. While aiding the regulator’s work, civil society participation essentially serves the purpose of democratising regulation by making it inclusive.

Another ingenious way of complementing the regulator’s work is private enforcement. Policymakers can encourage the enforcement of regulatory laws — especially in a country with a tradition of common law — by creating and incentivising the private right of action through courts.

For example, the US regulatory system has a diffuse set of regulators, primarily dependent on private parties instead of a centralised bureaucracy for enforcement. These incentives include the development of class action device, damage multipliers, statutory and punitive damages and fee shifting. Without getting into the reasons behind the Congress’s decision to encourage private enforcement and limit the authority of executive agencies, it can be said that it offers some distinct advantages. Conventional wisdom dictates that private parties have most knowledge about private wrongs, which gives them informational advantages over an often-distant public regulatory body. Moreover, unlike public regulatory agencies, a system of private enforcement does not lend itself to political capture owing to the multiplicity of stakeholders.

Policymakers in Pakistan have toyed with the idea of private enforcement. A recent landmark decision by the Lahore High Court allows banks to enforce mortgages under the Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Amendment Act, 2016. As a result, banks will be able to auction mortgaged property of loan defaulters without having to obtain a court order. There are other numerous avenues, which will benefit immensely because of private enforcement. Either way, unless contract and private enforcement improve dramatically, there is no way for the country to project itself as an investment-friendly destination. From high-profile cases of Reko Diq to the Competition Commission of Pakistan’s inquiries into cement cartels, courts have displayed inadequate understanding of commercial matters.

Policymakers must stop complaining of bureaucratic intransigence and start thinking of new ways to make regulation more open, inclusive and democratic.

The writer is director of the Sindh government’s Doing Business Reforms Implementation Unit

Published in Dawn, The Business and Finance Weekly, July 6th, 2020
Yemen famine
DAWN Editorial Jul 11 2020
PAKISTAN

THERE is yet more grim news from Yemen, as the UN says the Arab state is once more on the brink of famine. According to the World Food Programme, around 10m people face an acute shortage of food and that the people’s suffering is “unimaginable”. Moreover, the country, battered by over five years of war, is ill-prepared to face the coronavirus pandemic. While the official tally says there are around 1,300 cases, experts warn the real number may be over a million, as Yemen’s fragile health infrastructure is in no shape to give accurate data. If hunger and disease were not enough, Yemenis live in the constant shadow of death either from the skies, in the shape of Saudi-led bombardment of Houthi positions, or fighting on the ground between multiple factions.

In the immediate future, the international community cannot let Yemen’s vulnerable people starve to death. While the Covid-19 situation has greatly complicated matters, funds, foodstuff and safe passage must be guaranteed so that immediate succour can be provided to Yemenis, along with medical aid. But in the long run, there is only one workable solution to Yemen’s myriad problems: bringing this horrific war to a swift close. While truces have been called, and broken, it seems the world community has lost interest in Yemen and its forsaken people. Saudi Arabia, the UK and the US have indeed pledged large amounts of aid at a recent donors’ event for Yemen. But if they really want to help the country, these states must declare an indefinite ceasefire, and stop providing the weaponry that is helping prolong the war. Moreover, the principal Yemeni actors — the government, the Houthis, the southern separatists — as well as their primary foreign backers including the Saudis, the Iranians and the Emiratis, respectively, must hammer out an agreement that can help end hostilities forthwith, ensure the integrity and stability of Yemen, and give Yemenis a chance to rebuild their shattered country.

Published in Dawn, July 11th, 2020
https://www.dawn.com/


‘COVID-19 is worst health and economic crisis in last 100 years’: RBI Governor

New Delhi, July 11 (ANI): Reserve Bank of India (RBI) Governor, Shaktikanta Das joined virtual 7th SBI Banking and Economics Conclave on July 11. He said that COVID-19 is the worst health and economic crisis in last 100 years. “COVID19 is the worst health and economic crisis in last 100 years with unprecedented negative consequences for output, jobs and well being. It dented the existing world order, global value chains, labour and capital movements across globe,” said RBI Governor.

US Economics in Brief: Continued Record-High Unemployment Tells a Grim Tale for U.S. Economy


(Photo by Bytemarks / CC BY 2.0)
Continued Record-High Unemployment Tells a Grim Tale for U.S. Economy
Last week the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that as of mid-June, the U.S. the economy had 14.7 million fewer jobs than it did in February of this year, according to a blog post from the Economic Policy Institute (EPI). And for the 16th week in a row, unemployment claims are still more than two times higher than they were for the worst week of the Great Recession.
ZipRecruiter’s Labor Economist Julia Pollak told the New York Times, “Recent job reports are encouraging, but the increase in employment entirely reflects rehires of workers on temporary layoff. … The recovery in new hiring has yet to begin.”
New unemployment claims have remained above one million each week since the pandemic began in mid-March, according to the Washington Post.
In an interview with the Post, Adam Ozimek, chief economist at Upwork, stated that the “very high” number of initial unemployment claims “suggest[s] that damage is continuing to accumulate in the economy.”
The Times reported that as a surge of coronavirus cases threatens the country, concern persists that current jobless statistics don’t fully reflect the dire consequences for the economy.
“All these factors look more like an economy that is riding into a recession than out of one,” Ozimek tells the Post. “At this stage in the game, when we’re this far from the initial shock, it becomes less likely that new layoffs are the types of jobs that snap back.”
EPI also highlighted how the recession has caused greater job loss in Black households than in white households.
In its report, the institute called on policymakers to expand unemployment benefits, including the extension of the extra $600 in weekly benefits, which are set to expire before the end of July and which the Institute characterized as “probably the most effective part of CARES Act.”
“Letting the extra $600 expire would be a disaster for UI recipients, who would have to drastically cut their spending, and for the economy, which is being held afloat by this spending,” says the institute in its post. Additionally, they call for federal, state and local lawmakers to take direct action, without which they predict “5.3 million workers in the public and private sector will lose their jobs by the end of 2021.” — Nicolette White
Seattle Votes In Favor of Payroll Tax for Amazon And Other Larger Companies
After an ongoing battle, a newly passed ordinance by the Seattle City Council will impose a payroll tax on the city’s biggest businesses, including Amazon.
According to GeekWire, the money allocated by the JumpStart Tax, expected to be $214 million annually, will be used for COVID-19 relief and will later fund affordable housing and homeless services. The bill passed Monday 7–2 and will take effect by 2021. With this legislation, businesses will pay a tax based on their annual payroll expenses.
Companies with annual payroll expenses over $7 million will be subject to a tax on highly paid employees’ annual salaries. Employers will be taxed 0.7 percent on employee salaries between $150,000 and $399,999 and 1.7 percent on salaries higher than $400,000. Employers with payroll expenses of more than $1 billion will be taxed 1.4 percent for salaries between $150,000 to $399,000 and 2.4 percent on salaries exceeding $400,000.
Seattle City Council estimates about 800 businesses will pay this tax. Grocery stores, non-profit hospitals, and insurance companies will be exempt.
Amazon has yet to comment on the JumpStart tax, but the company was not in favor of the city’s 2018 head tax, which was widely seen as a predecessor of the JumpStart tax. That tax would have made companies grossing over $20 million annually pay $247 per employee. Experts had expected this would generate about $47 million yearly from 3 percent of Seattle’s largest companies.
Still, less than a month after approving the head tax, the council repealed it in the face of mounting political pressure. But this winter, Councilmember Kshama Sawant launched a “Tax Amazon” 2.0 campaign. Her campaign helped fuel the JumpStart tax.
“Every square inch of this city is starting to be a space that only the very wealthy, only the billionaires, only the most massive profitable corporations can inhabit,” Sawant said at a rally in 2018, as reported at the time by Next City.
“Thank you to the large coalition of community organizations who supported this plan – investing in Seattle is investing in our economy and our future,” said Seattle City Council budget chair Teresa Mosqueda, who introduced the JumpStart legislation, in a statement following Monday’s decision. Mosqueda added the tax’s approval is a “big step towards creating a progressive tax system that works for all.” –Eddi Cabrera Blanco
Alternate CRA Framework Would Boost Community Development Lending By $28 Billion
There’s been some back and forth on the Community Reinvestment Act. After the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) finalized its overhaul, leaving banks regulated by the FDIC and Federal Reserve operating under different rules, Rep. Maxine Waters then introduced legislation to repeal the changes entirely. Now, the National Community Reinvestment Coalition has had enough. The organization released its own proposal, which it says would increase community development lending and investment by between $15 and $28 billion.
The Community Reinvestment Act requires banks “to meet the credit needs” of the communities in which they operate. Banks undergo periodic CRA examinations and receive a grade of “outstanding,” “high satisfactory,” “low satisfactory,” “needs to improve,” or “noncompliance.” NCRC proposes comparing banks to their peer groups, rather than against an arbitrary standard; the group also proposes adding a qualitative portion to the CRA exam, counting for about 20 percent of the total grade, which would ensure that community development lending by a bank was “responsive to a community’s needs.” Currently, all lending in low-income areas, whether it’s to build affordable housing or a sports stadium, “counts” for CRA credit.
The NCRC believes that the rating system “would prompt several low-performing banks to improve performance.” Assuming that all banks want to pass their CRA exams, switching to the NCRC’s grading system could increase community development lending from $159 billion to $187 billion, a difference of $28 billion the group said.
Separately, the NCRC as well as the California Reinvestment Coalition have sued the OCC, arguing that the agency violated federal rulemaking standards when it updated the CRA.
This article is part of The Bottom Line, a series exploring scalable solutions for problems related to affordability, inclusive economic growth and access to capital. Click here to subscribe to our Bottom Line newsletter. The Bottom Line is made possible with support from Citi Community Development.

DOWNLOAD PDF

'The birth of bio-politics': Michel Foucault's lecture at the Collège de France on neo-liberal governmentality

The Birth of Biopolitics, the course delivered in 1979, is edited by. Michel Senellart. A.. new aspect oLMichelFQucault's "ceUY:r~" ~publ~h~g \\\with this edition 



Michel Foucault’s The Birth of Biopolitics and Contemporary NeoLiberalism Debates

Terry Flew, Professor of Media and Communication, Creative
Industries Faculty, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane,
Australia

ABSTRACT
Neo-liberalism has become one of the boom concepts of our time. From its original
reference point as a descriptor of the economics of the “Chicago School” or authors such
as Friedrich von Hayek, neo-liberalism has become an all-purpose descriptor, explanatory
device and basis for social critique. This presentation evaluates Michel Foucault’s 1978-
79 lectures, published as The Birth of Biopolitics, to consider how he used the term neoliberalism, and how this equates with its current uses in critical social and cultural theory.
It will be argued that Foucault did not understand neo-liberalism as a dominant ideology
in these lectures, but rather as marking a point of inflection in the historical evolution of
liberal political philosophies of government. It will also be argued that his interpretation
of neo-liberalism was more nuanced and more comparative than more recent
contributions, and points towards an attempt to theorise comparative historical models of
liberal capitalism.

KEYWORDS
Neo-liberalism; Foucault; governmentality; markets; enterprise.

WORD COUNT: 9,154 words (excluding front-matter, footnotes and bibliography).

PDF https://eprints.qut.edu.au/39575/3/39575.pdf

The Count of Psyche : The birth of bio-politics and bio-ethics in early modern China

Joyce C. H. Liu
P      LONG READ THIS IS AN EXCERPT

Texte intégral

Format non disponible
Signaler ce document
[Vitalpolitik is] “a policy of life, which is not essentially orientated to increased earnings and reduced hours of work, like traditional social policy, but which takes cognizance of the worker’s whole vital situation, his real, concrete situation, from morning to night and from night to morning,” material and moral hygiene, the sense of property, the sense of social integration, etcetera, being in his view as important as earnings and hours of work.
Rüstow, quoted by F. Bilger, La Pensée économique libérale, p. 106; re-quoted by Foucault, The Birth of Biopolitics. p. 157n.
Political economy … is not a system for controlling men’s actions, but for discovering how men are induced by their natural propensities to act.
John Hill Burton’s Chambers’s Educational Course: Political Economy for Use in Schools, and for Private Instruction, p. 49, emphasis mine.
1This essay examines the complicit hidden ties between the rise of liberalist economic subject and the discursive mode of domination of bio-ethical life in modern China. In late nineteenth and the beginning of the twentieth century, there emerged a wide spread nexus of discourse related to the formulation of a powerful psyche-force of the new people for modern China. This mode of discursive formulation presents on the one hand the psyche that is an autonomous and free agent in the line of production for the individual’s own interest, while at the same time the psyche force is described as a countable, calculable, correctable, controllable and utilizable moral force or capital for the interest of the nation and the coming civil society. The individual at this converging point both as the liberalist political economic agent and as the ethical-calculable nationalist moral subject is then placed within the nationalist project of cultivation, training and correction. The aim of this essay is to answer the question why, in the Chinese context historically and culturally, the modern subject is so prone to the domination of the nationalist sentiments. I would like to argue that, long before the May Fourth intellectuals’ efforts to awake the enlightenment movement in the 1919, the mode of a governable and calculable modern subject had been established through the revolutionary intellectuals’ discursive responses to the contemporary world. It is what I called the moments of the birth of ethical-bio-politics in early modern China. In order to probe effectively into the complexity of this issue, I need to first run through the main argument in Foucault’s book The The Birth of BiopoliticsLectures at the Collège de France 1978-1979. I consider Fouault’s lectures of this year a significant link to his later lectures on the ethical subject and the hermeneutics of subject that point to the ambiguous problems of bio-politics of today.

1. The crossroads of political economy and the rise of new civil society

2In Foucault’s lectures during 1978-1979 on the birth of biopolitics, the double movement of the mechanism of liberalist political economic is closely studied and localized: on the one hand, it relies on the individual’s volunteering and autonomous commitment with his free will to work and to exercise his potential; one the other hand, it takes the entire life of the individual, including the physical and moral hygiene, into account for the management and production for the enterprise. According to Foucault, starting from the eighteenth century, there is the attempt in the discourse of political economy to rationalize the problems posed to governmental practice by phenomena characteristic of a set of living beings forming a population. Foucault takes liberalism as a principle and method of the rationalization of the exercise of government, a rationalization that obeys “the internal rule of maximum economy.” (Foucault 2008: 318) Even though liberal thought starts from the civil society instead of the state, the question behind it is how to govern. In this line of thought, government becomes necessary and the justification of its existence defines the ends it pursues with regard to the particular society. The technology of a particular government and its forms of schematization is actually derived from the rationalization of the composition of that society. When the logic of political economy is superimposed on the logic of social governmentality, it gives rise to what Foucault called the “birth of biopolitics.”
3The intriguing problem about the liberalist economic subject or the economic man, homo oeconomicus, is that, although it is let alone to do his own work in the economic system, following the principle of laisser-faire, his is “eminently governable.” (Foucault 2008: 270) The individual would pursue his own interest, but his interest has already been posited in the way that it would converge spontaneously with the interest of others. Homo oeconomicus, according to Foucault, is actually the person “who accepts reality” and therefore “someone manageable, someone who responds systematically to systematic modifications artificially introduced into the environment,” and consequently “the correlate of a governmentality.” (Foucault 2008: 270-271) The paradox of the liberalist economic man Foucault presents in his studies points to the fact that, instead of an atom of freedom, the home oeconomicus is already a certain type of subject who precisely enable an art of government to be determined according to the principle of economy. This problem of home oeconomicus leads Foucault to reconsider the concept of subject introduced by English empiricism, that is, a subject not defined by his freedom, or by the opposition of body and soul, or by the presence of something marked by the Fall or sin, but a form of subject of individual choices which are both irreducible and non-transferable. This irreducible and non-transferable point is the “regressive end point” of the rationality, judgment, reasoning, or calculation of the individual choices and is referred to the subject himself as “interest.” This “subject of interest,” whether it is related to self-preservation or to sympathy, is primarily based on “subjective will.” Even though subjected and constrained by the contract, the “subject of interest” remains, subsists and continues up to the time of the juridical contract and overflows the “subject of right.” (Foucault 2008: 272-274)
4The different logic governing the subject of interest and the subject of right is that the subject of right is by definition a split subject who acknowledges some natural and immediate rights but also agrees to the principle of self-renunciation, as what law and the prohibition function in the juridical system, but the subject of interest, according to the economists, never has to relinquish his interest. Foucault points out that in the eighteenth century, the figure of home oeconomicus and the figure of homo juridicus or homo legalis are heterogeneous and cannot be superimposed on each other. Foucault refers to Adam Smith’s The Wealth of Nations and stressed the importance of the “invisibility” of the hand of the “totality” which eludes the individual while at the same time founds the rationality of his egoistic choices and, Foucault adds, “if the totality of the process eludes each economic man, there is however a point where the whole is completely transparent to a sort of gaze of someone whose invisible hand, following the logic of this gaze and what it sees, draws together the threads of all these dispersed interest.” The invisibility of the collective good is essential to the process because the collective good “must not be an objective” and “cannot not be calculated.” (Foucault 2008: 278-280) No economic agent or political agent should or could account for the totality of the process of the collective good. Foucault writes:
Thus the economic world is naturally opaque and naturally non-totalizable. It is originally and definitively constituted from a multiplicity of points of view which is all the more irreducible as this same multiplicity assures their ultimate and spontaneous convergence. Economics is an atheistic discipline; economics is a discipline without God; economics is a discipline without totality; economics is a discipline that begins to demonstrate not only the pointlessness, but also the impossibility of a sovereign point of view over the totality of the state that he has to govern. Economics steals away from the juridical form of the sovereign exercising sovereignty within a state precisely that which is emerging as the essential element of a society’s life, namely economic processes. Liberalism acquired its modern shape precisely with the formulation of this essential incompatibility between the non-totalizable multiplicity of economic subjects of interest and the totalizing unity of the juridical sovereign. (Foucault 2008: 282, emphasis mine)
5To Foucault, the heterogeneity and incompatibility of the economic world and the political-juridical world of the eighteenth century could serve as a critique of governmental reason. The basic function of Adam Smith’s theory of the invisible hand is to disqualify the political sovereign. But, throughout the nineteenth and the twentieth centuries, different forms of socialism, state socialism and the state-controlled economy, all tried to work out some kind of definition of the economic sovereignty. The principle of laissez-faire in the physiocrats, for example, is to establish the correspondence between the sovereign and the economic processes or the economic agents, basing on the evidence and the Economic Table they constructed. It is here, Foucault says, that we find the idea that “economic agents must be allowed their freedom” and that “a political sovereignty will cover the totality of the economic process with a gaze in the uniform light, as it were, of evidence.” (Foucault 2008: 285-286)
6What Foucault offers is a very complex picture of the intersection and crossroad of the political economic and the political governmentality. According to Foucault, Adam Smith’s theory from the start was not meant to serve as governmentality rationality. “Economic science cannot be the science of government and economics cannot be the internal principle, law, rule of conduct, or rationality of government.” (Foucault 2008: 286) But, when the two incompatible worlds collate and superimposed on one another, the questions arises: how is the theory of the invisible hand served as the governmental rationality? How is the theory of civil society served as the converging point of political economic and governmentality rationality? The governability or governmentability of the economic subject is made possible through a “new ensemble” which makes him both subject of right and subject of economic agents, and this convergence brings in what Foucault calls “the liberal art of governing,” the field where such liberalist governmentality could exercise is “civil society.” (Foucault 2008: 294-295)
7Here is the crucial question that Foucault proposes in his seminar, and it is also the central concern of my current study: what is the rationality and the technology to govern, according to the rule of right, the civil society, a space of sovereignty which is inhabited by economic subject? Foucault points out that civil society is not a philosophical idea, but a concept of governmental technology, and the problem of civil society is “the juridical structure of a governmentality pegged to the economic structure.” Foucault writes:
And I think that civil society—which is very quickly called society, and which at the end of the eighteenth century is called the nation—makes a self-limitation possible for governmental practice and an art of government, for reflection on this art of government and so for a governmental technology. … An omnipresent government, a government which nothing escapes, a government which conforms to the rules of right, and a government which nevertheless respects the specificity of the economy, will be a government that manages civil society, the nation, society, the social. (Foucault 2008: 296)
8How should the subject be managed so that he can be left alone, laisser-faire, and work for his own interest while the whole nation or the civil society can benefit according to the rationality of the government? The omnipresent government is built upon these autonomous economic subjects. “Homo oeconomicus is, if you like, the abstract, ideal, purely economic point that inhabits the dense, full, and complex reality of civil society. Or, alternatively, civil society is the concrete ensemble within which these ideal points, economic men, must be placed so that they can be appropriately managed.” (Foucault 2008: 296) It is in this same ensemble of the technology of liberal governmentality that homo oeconomicus and civil society belong.
9The irony is clear here. The civil society invoked to resist against the government or the state, the state apparatuses or institutions, turns out to be the very thing that forms part of modern governmental technology. Foucault demonstrates how Adam Smith’s economic analysis is transformed in Furgerson’s text as the theories of civil society, combining Smith’s concept of nation, including viewing civil society as an historical-natural constant, with spontaneous synthesis of individuals, a permanent matrix of political power and that it constitutes the “motor of history.” The civil society or the nation is the motor of history precisely because it is not only the spontaneous synthesis and subordination but it also carries the element of dissociation, that is, the egoism of homo oeconomicus. The multiplications and modifications of the blind initiatives of the egoist interests and individual calculations are infinite, and the transformation of civil society is endless. This never-ending generation of history makes the formation of new social fabric possible. Also, civil society calls for a government as an organic component of the social bond as an organic feature of the form of authority. These characteristics make the civil society in Furguson’s text very different from that of Hobbes, Rousseau and Montesquieu because the economic problems are introduced into new technologies of government. (Foucault 2008: 298-308)
10The crossroads Foucault analyzes in Furguson’s text reveal a domain opening up of collective and political units which go beyond the purely economic bond, and yet without being purely juridical, and that this space cannot be superimposed on the structures of the contract and the game of rights. But, the demand for a new form of civil society gives rise to new forms of sovereign individuality basing on the strategy of interests of the individual sovereign, and to new forms of truth that is manifested through the rationality of history. Just as what Foucault points out, since the sixteen and seventeenth century in the West, the exercise of power has been adjusted according to calculation of force, relations, wealth and factors of strength. Rationality becomes the foundation of modern forms of governmental technology. Different forms of rationality, the rationality of the sovereign state, of economic agents, of the governed, speak about different ways of calculating and regulating the art of government. The principle of rationality of the nationalist and statist politics as well as the rationality of the truth regime continue in spite of the transformations of the technologies of governmentality. The birth of the new forms of calculation and regulation of the civil society or the nationalist state in the twentieth century, ways of governing the population, including health, hygiene, birth, race, and so on, is founded precisely through the long process of the discourse of political economy since mid-eighteenth century down to the nineteenth century.
11To me, the problem lies more in how in such crossroads and intersections, with the cleaving up and opening of new space for civil society, even though the juridical system and economic bond has not been established yet, the discursive modes of new ways of calculation and regulation has already infiltrated in the same texts. The crucial question is: how the individual in the society, a society in the making, a society that is invoked to rebel against the present government, is accounted for the rise either of a new civil society or a new nation state, and through what irreducible rationality and reasoning these individuals are posited. The texts that I would like to examine in this current essay point to what I called the moments of the birth of ethical-bio-politics in modern China. I would like to argue that, in late Qing China, at the end of the nineteenth century and the beginning of the twentieth century, on the eve of the republic’s revolution, and twenty years before the May Fourth Enlightenment Movement, the emerging new mode of discourse on the “count” of psyche among the intellectuals gives rise to the rationality of psyche ruling for later governments. With the borrowed Western knowledge of modern physics and chemistry on the one hand, and the theories of political economy and the civil society/nation state on the other hand, Chinese intellectuals, through the aids of the missionaries in China and the translated texts from Japan, build up a mode of hermeneutics on psyche that stresses on the countable, utilizable, controllable, accumulative, and correctable nature of psyche. Psyche force was described as the force, using the metaphor of electricity, to be tamed and directed so that it can serve the aims of the State. Moreover, the individual’s psyche force was accounted as part of the national capital and as a share that is responsible for the production of the national interest, in Benthamian reasoning. Liang Qichao’s essay on the “New People” was an exemplary text that demonstrated how the ethical subject was constructed in the way that the bio (life) and the ethics of the individuals were discursively formulated in an ethico-political-economic to contribute to the collective good defined in the name of nation.