It is generally believed that unity, discipline, consensus, and faith are those components which play very important role in nation building, national development, and national progress. But what is sometime ignored is the politicization of these elements to promote and strengthen the ruling classes  and ultimately paving the way for dictatorship and, as a result, deprive  people of their freedom. In this essay, an attempt is made to understand the role of these elements which are used negatively and against the interests of people.

The concept of unity is generally idealized , admired, sought, and adopted with the motive to achieve greatness with its help. Therefore, whenever we refer to unity it is always in terms of energy, power,  strength and political domination. In historical context we always see its role in  formation of nations, foundation of empires, and creation of great culture and civilization . In terms of decline and fall of the great empires and civilizations , the role of unity is highly projected and highlighted. Once society declines, it always remembers the days of its power in term of unity and  attributes the reasons for its decline to disunity. Its thinkers and politicians always give  emphasis to the revival of unity which could again restore their old past  glory. Keeping in view this popular  concept, we have to analyse the idea of unity as well as its role in history, and see whether it played a positive or negative role  in shaping history.

Generally it is believed that scattered groups  and individuals cannot achieve any thing unless they are united and conserve their energy; only then are they in  a position to create something great and substantial. What is ignored in this context is the violent process of unification of different groups and   force which was used to assimilate them in a larger group  and transforming them into a monolith community, mostly against their will. In the process of assimilation and integration, they have to surrender not only their identity and self but their culture. In the past, ethnic, linguistic, and religious groups  were integrated  under a symbol of a king or ruling dynasty. Once the task of unification was completed,  accumulated energy of people was used for political expansion. It  became a tool in the hand of political leadership which exploited it for  its political ends. The power of unity  demanded  political expansion and domination  In the past the Roman , the Arab, and the Ottoman empires are the examples of such imperialism. And the most recent examples are the unification of Italy and Germany in the 19^th century which transformed both countries as imperialist and expansionist powers. On the recent reunification of Germany, the German novelist Gunther Grass warned not only Germans but also the Europeans to beware of this reunification because it might awake among the Germans the revival of past glory and they might choose the same old Nazi policy of Lebensraum. “Once more we’ll be united, strong, and our voice—even if we speak softly—will be loud and clear. Eventually, because enough is never enough, we’ll succeed, with our strong currency and after formal recognition of Poland’s western border, in subjugating economically  large chunk of Pomerania, and so once more-following the German fairy-tale pattern-we will be feared and isolated.”

The analysis shows that unity and unification  always created a strong urge for  political domination at the cost of weaker  groups  and nationalities . Political domination  paved the way for cultural  hegemony of imperial power which  homogenized culture .Once an imperial power consolidated its position, it centralizes its administration  and concentrated all power at the imperial court which became the centre for all political, social, cultural, and literary activities and attracted the talented people to leave their ancestral homes and come to the court for patronization. This made peripheries culturally backward and  barren. Accumulation of talent in one place created imbalance in the society. This  pattern we can see nearly in all great empires. The case of the Mughal empire is the best because we are aware of its history and the development of its political as well as cultural institutions.

 During the heydays of the Mughal empire, its court attracted men of letters, musicians, artists, and architectures not only within the different parts of India but also from Iran and central Asia. The political domination of the Mughal empire reduced the status of the tributary rulers and they were no longer in a position to patronize the talent as generously as the emperor. The result was that cultural development was concentrated  at the imperial court. Only when the Mughal dynasty declined and the Mughal  emperor lost its political power, the concentrated culture scattered throughout India and reached even to the small cities and towns. So, the period of the Mughal decline was not only the period of political disintegration but also cultural diffusion. The weakness of its political power gave an opportunity to the regional powers to assert their identity and by being separate from the Imperial unity, they emerged politically and culturally as dynamic powers. 

With the decline of kingship , this symbol of unity came to an end .In the modern period it is replaced by nationalism which undertakes the task to unite all the people irrespective of their religion, language, and race. Now slogans for unity are one nation, one  national culture, one national flag, one national anthem, and sometimes one national language. Nationalism, in the process of integration , compels groups belonging to different identities to get absorbed into one  national identity. As Eric Habsbawm shows in his book on “Nationalism” that in order to make the French language as national language all other languages which were  in use in France  were eliminated. The same pattern was followed by Mustaffa Kamal Ataturk who prohibited, for example, Kurds not to speak their language and adopt the Turkish language as a national one. The Turkish ethnic group of Irani Azerbaijan are compelled  to  recognize only Persian as the national language. There are no arrangement officially to teach the Turkish to the Ethnic Turkish people. In the first phase of Pakistani history, the attempt was made to follow the same pattern and Urdu was declared as the only national language, which subsequently created a gulf first between East and West Pakistan and later on in Sindh , NWFP. and Baluchistan. The Pakistani leadership tried to unite the nation on the basis of religion and language. The motive behind this national unity  was to throttle political opposition and consolidate the political domination of a clique. Centralisation followed in the name of national unity and all ethnic and linguistic identities were condemned. East Pakistan , first reacted against the policy of national unity which culminated into the separation of East Pakistan and the birth of Bengladesh. It was later on followed by the smaller provinces who resisted against the policy of integration and asserted their separate identity. We are still facing the problem what to choose: unity or diversity.

Nations, after passing  through political experience reach the conclusion that  a society cannot be structured  as a monolith community. Homogeneity reduces creativity and make society colourless. It is also against the norms of democracy which encourages popular participation  and  keeps cultural diversity. The political leadership of newly emerging independent countries of Asia and Africa,  in order to consolidate their domination, assert to unite their nations on the basis of emotional and sentimental slogans. By using  official media, they mobilize people in favour of their policies and create a consensus on national issues. Consensus in the hands of political leaders becomes a dangerous weapon which is used to crush political opposition. Once, difference of opinion becomes intolerable, society also uses consensus to force individuals holding  opposite views to keep quite. This is  what happened recently, when the explosion of bomb  created a public europhobia and government propaganda,  by mobilizing all its resources, created consensus on this issue. The result was that  majority of people refused to listen to any thing against the explosion. Therefore, whenever, a society gets  consensus, it paves the way for dictatorship and transforms society into an intolerant one.

Political leadership  has  its own  concept of discipline ,to maintain their political domination, the leadership exhorts people to keep discipline  which  means to act, to move, and  to think with unanimity. In such order and discipline an individual has no separate identity and no separate role to play in a society. He has to comply what  leadership orders and what a community demands. The discipline of army always fascinate the political leadership  because it is hierarchical , status oriented, based on the blind obedience of its commander, and with a sense  of  high morality and justice. That’s why in schools and colleges students are asked to wear uniform and look alike. They are trained to act as a group and not as an individual. In the factories, workers are also organized on the same disciplinary basis as the army. Political parties, in the name of discipline, organize their guards which obey them without asking  or challenging their order. How Hitler and Mussolini  mesmerized their audience and demanded complete loyalty, romanticize most of the political leadership, because a disciplined society suits them to rule without any opposition. It is easy to control them in the name of national interest and demand them to sacrifice everything for the  motherland.

Another value which also plays significant rule in strengthening the absolute rule is faith, which means to accept all thing without any challenge and blindly follow the orders from above. If a society has faith in the political leadership, it is expected to follow whatever is ordered. Therefore, a society having deep rooted faith becomes very intolerant because  there is no space for debate, discourse, or opposition which can broaden their horizon.

When the elements of unity, discipline, and faith are politicised and exploited  to achieve political ends, the result is authoritarianism and dictatorship; the emergence of personality cult and glorification of a hero, who mostly leads societies to collective suicide.

Individuals and  groups of people  have their own separate identity, their own cultural diversity, their own way of thinking, and their own  psyche; they cannot be forced to surrender their characteristics and get absorbed in a melting pot. A colourful society is one which is a bowl of salad. The political leadership of Pakistan has to understand it and  take care not to use national unity, consensus, discipline and faith for their dictatorial motives.