Pakistan was conceived as an ideological state, founded upon Islamic principles, moral responsibility, and mutual respect. Yet an uncomfortable question confronts us today: do our collective attitudes still reflect those ideals? Does character assassination, ridicule, and the use of abusive language in the name of political disagreement suit a civilized society? Recent events suggest that our social and political conduct demands serious introspection.
In recent weeks, a sustained social media campaign targeting Punjab Chief Minister Maryam Nawaz Sharif has reignited debate about the fine line between legitimate political criticism and outright character assassination. In democratic societies, dissent is not merely tolerated it is valued as a sign of political maturity. However, when criticism descends into personal attacks, mockery, and vulgarity, it ceases to strengthen democracy and instead signals moral decline.
Senior Provincial Minister Maryam Aurangzeb and Provincial Information Minister Uzma Zahid Bukhari have also pointed out what they describe as an organized smear campaign against the Chief Minister. They argue that any attempt to pursue legal action against such behavior is immediately portrayed as a curb on freedom of expression. This raises a critical question: does freedom of speech permit the use of indecent and derogatory language against any individual particularly a woman holding public office?
Social media has undoubtedly expanded the boundaries of expression. Yet the growth of digital platforms has not been matched by a corresponding growth in responsibility. In the fervor of political allegiance, some supporters adopt rhetoric that not only weakens their own position but also contaminates the broader political culture. If political activists truly believe in their cause, they must rely on evidence, policy critique, and performance-based arguments not personal vilification.
This responsibility does not rest with one party alone. All political stakeholders, including the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) and other parties, must ensure that their workers and media teams adhere to ethical standards. Leadership must set the tone: disagreement is legitimate, abuse is not.
The national media, too, must engage in self-reflection. When a female politician becomes the target of sustained indecent attacks, silence whether driven by ratings or political convenience undermines journalistic integrity. The media’s role is not merely to report events but to uphold societal standards of discourse.
It is equally important to acknowledge that women in politics often face a double standard. Instead of being evaluated solely on their governance and performance, they are subjected to scrutiny of their personality, attire, and private lives. Such attitudes reveal not only gender bias but also the immaturity of our political conversation.
Democracy flourishes through disagreement, not hostility; through critique, not contempt. If we aspire to become a mature and enlightened society, we must elevate political discourse from abuse to argument, from slander to substance. Character assassination may inflame passions temporarily, but only reasoned and dignified dialogue leaves a lasting impact.
The question remains: will we confine our Islamic traditions and moral values to slogans, or will we embody them in our political and social conduct? The choice, ultimately, is ours.
Comments are closed, but trackbacks and pingbacks are open.