By Arifa Noor

Street power is the new political black. But in this era, it is not the unwashed masses that have taken to the streets but the well educated and much showered. It’s not just the Middle East that is witnessing this. Across the border in India, society has been overwhelmed by the anti-corruption drive led by a seventy four year old, Anna Hazare.

Originally published by Dawn

Here in Pakistan too the movement has enthralled those who can tear their eyes away from the mayhem in Karachi. But few realise that we have already been here before with the movement to restore the judiciary?

Consider the parallels.

By the time Hazare had begun his fast in India, the Congress led government had already been shaken by a series of corruption scandals. The elderly man simply tapped into the mood of the moment.

Four years ago, another unpopular government, which too had been rocked by the killing of Nawab Akbar Bugti and the Supreme Court judgment against the privatisation of the Steel Mills, needed one last push. And General (retd) Pervez Musharraf provided it when he decided to send a judge home (instead of to jail).

The judge’s defiance caught the imagination of a people; the movement that was born finally led to the restoration of the judiciary three years later.

But as the movement gathered support critics panned it for being too rightwing — it was supported by too many of those who had gathered around General Zia ul Haq before and after he ousted Zulfikar Ali Bhutto — the JI and PMLN were cases in point.

Hazare skeptics echo similar arguments as they shake their heads in horror at his words of praise for Narendra Moti, the chief minister of Gujrat who presided over the pogrom in his state.

Even Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s words, as he stressed the need to let the parliament handle the bill on corruption and dismissed hunger strikes and fasts, were reminiscent of the PPP government’s assertions that they were not voted into power to restore the judiciary. Both the governments asserted the legitimacy of the electoral process and rejected tactics such as protests and fasts.

And of course, how can one ignore the assault of the enfant terrible of India, Arundhati Roy, who blasted Hazare’s conservative views and his support from and for all that is corporate and middle class.

It sounded so familiar. In Pakistan, when the middle class epithet did not prove enough, the judge was said to enjoy the military’s support.

This is not to say that the critics and skeptics don’t have a point to make but it appears that the context is missing.

Both the Hazare movement in India and the judiciary movement in Pakistan are essentially middle class. Similar to but completely different from the populist movements that threw up Bhutto (with his roti, kapra aur makan) in Pakistan and compelled Indira Gandhi in India to adopt populism(her slogan was gharibi hatao).

But where the seventies threw up a politically aware peasantry and labour class, the noughties in the subcontinent gave birth to a middle class. And while the mobilised poor wanted jobs and patronage (issues that still dominate in rural electoral arenas) from those they voted for, the middle class has a more complex value system. As their physical and economic survival is not at stake, the more comfortable in life yearn for abstract values as good governance — whether it translates into less corruption or more checks and balances on the powers of a dictator or an elected government.

The western press is awash with the stories of ordinary Indians who are tired of paying bribes to get through life. Hazare’s demand, regardless of his views and his supporters, appeals to them.

A certain section of Pakistanis too were tired of Musharraf’s bluster and his government’s shenanigans. They too found a cause to support, which personified justice and checks on governments. And when the PPP government later refused to restore the judiciary (and made some pretty amazing political blunders along the way), the cause was reinvented.

In both cases, abstract values such as justice and good governance dominated.

These values are essentially middle class. But then so is democracy. Let’s not forget that the democratic system emerged in the West hand in glove with capitalism and the middle class.

And yes, neither the restoration of the judiciary brought justice to Pakistan and neither will the victory of the Hazare movement end corruption in India.

But then building a democracy is more difficult and painstaking than one successful street movement or one dramatic moment. It is a journey over a bumpy road with no destination in sight. Democracy has to be shaped and honed and evolved – always. What else is President Barack Obama trying to do in the United States as he brings in a new health care package or tries to get rid of the tax cuts for the rich that George Bush signed up for?

These two movements are but one stepping stone in the evolution of Pakistan and India as were the independence movements and the era of Gandhi and Bhutto.

They have their place in history and this cannot be denied by their detractors or blown out of proportion by their supporters.

As for those who worry about the inherent conservatism of these two movements? Democracy with its support base in the middle class is conservative. The Puritans who shipped off to the United States and founded one of the first colonies in the new world are a case in point. Or for a most recent example, one just needs to look at the AKP in Turkey.

Arifa Noor is Dawn’s resident editor in Islamabad.