Although most of our politicians, MNAs and MPAs are political freeloaders doing politics to build their own fortunes through corruption which is in-built in the archaic colonial system of governance, but none can be compared to the self-styled son of Rawalpindi Sheikh Rasheed Ahmed widely known as ‘Sheeda Tulli’. Whoever conferred this epithet on him was right on money to describe his real character. He is uncouth, loud-mouth and devious.
These traits surely helped him to build relations with politicians who needed somebody for the character assassination of their opponents. This he did first of all for Ch Zahoor Elahi who used him against the PPP leadership in exchange for financial dole-outs. Then he switched over to the PPP which also used him for similar purposes. That was the time when he gained access to gate number four of GHQ which also needed a town-crier like him to drum up support for their unconstitutional pursuits. That explains the reason why he has been a federal minister 16 times. It also puts into perspective his voyage from rags to riches.
If my memory serves me right I heard Ghulam Mustaf Khar giving him a shut-up call on the floor of the Majlise Shura and shaming him for having received money from him when he was Governor Punjab. He was also snubbed by Moonis Elahi when, as Interior Minister, he took a swipe at the PML(Q) leadership saying that he was standing with Imran Khan like a rock and was not like those people who had only five seats and were blackmailing Imran Khan for the Chief Ministership of Punjab. Moonis Elahi reminded him that during his student life he used to take money from the leaders of the same party. He is the same Sheikh Rasheed whom Imran Khan insulted in a live TV programme with Hamid Mir and at a public rally castigating his politics, remarking that he would not take him even as his peon.
In the 1993 and 1997 general elections Sheikh Rasheed returned to the National Assembly on a PML(N) ticket, and during that time he never tired of showering praise on Nawaz Sharif as a great leader and his political mentor. He paraded a live lion on Murree Road Rawalpindi during one of the election campaigns. After becoming an ally of PTI in spite of the bitterness that existed between him and Imran Khan, he acts as more loyal than the king in portraying him as a saviour and great reformer.
In the USA and the UK, some political slurs are used to shame and denigrate politicians who are unprincipled, lack the heft to stand firm on their taken stand, change loyalties frequently or indulge in politics of self-aggrandizement. A word that has been frequently used in the USA as a political slur is ‘Squish’. It is a term used by Republican conservatives to denigrate the perceived lack of backbone possessed by the Republican moderates. This word surfaced during the time of Ronald Reagan. Squish has also been used more broadly, to describe any liberal or conservative who avoids taking firm stands or doesn’t stand for anything– a politician who will sell out, who lacks conviction, who cares more about popularity than principles. Another definition of a Squish is someone who has difficulty in making up his mind and is too anxious to please, too eager to compromise and who can be easily rolled.
‘Flap-doodler’ is also a commonly used slur for a politician, a speaker of portentous but empty words best described as a demagogue. The term ‘Flip-Flopper’ is used for a politician who is habitual of changing his or her opinion or taking position on a particular issue. ‘Pollywog’ denotes a politician who is considered untrustworthy because of his ever-shifting position on the issues at hand and whose track record corroborates the epithet. Another political slur that is often used to denigrate a politician is ‘Rent-a-Quote’. It is someone who might be relied upon by the media to provide a comment, especially one expressing a strong or contentious opinion either in any circumstances or when a particular issue is being discussed. ‘Snollygoster’ is used to describe a politician who is unprincipled and engages in politics of self-aggrandizement rather than serving national interests. Another epithet given to a politician who discusses and debate issues but fails to act is ‘Tire-kicker’.
It is amazing that a politician like Sheikh Rasheed on whom all the political slurs mentioned above apply and who has only one seat in Parliament which he earned courtesy of another party, is engaged by almost all the TV channels for his outlandish comments and some channels even extend the courtesy of hour-long exclusive interactions with him. People are also amazed at his audacity to make tall claims about his political character and morals, knowing well that he is a politician who has adopted a myriad of hues during his political journey.
In the UK, a political slur which is quite often used to shame a political opponent is ‘snowflake’. It generally implies a weak politician who is overly sensitive and incapable of dealing with any opinion that differs from his own; a person who is too easily offended, too in need of safe spaces and is too fragile. It is also used to describe a politician who is self-centred and suffers from self-delusion.
A cursory glance at our political history would reveal that the foregoing political slurs can safely be bestowed upon our politicians who have recklessly indulged in politics of self-aggrandizement; lacked the spine to stand up to the anti-democratic forces; have been even conniving with anti-democratic forces to destabilize democracy and democratic institutions for their personal gains; have been changing their political loyalties to swell their fortunes and have been selling their souls to remain in the corridors of power.
The end result is that the country has suffered enormously due to their shenanigans and most of the challenges confronting the country in one way or the other are linked to the misdeeds of the politicians. They have failed to learn from the setbacks the country has suffered. They never tire of proclaiming their political credentials but continue to rally forces to destabilize the elected government of an opponent party and strengthen the hands of the forces inimical to democracy.
The media as a representative of the society is supposed to defend and promote democracy which is also imperative for its own freedom, but regrettably a section of it is feverishly engaged in strengthening the anti-democratic forces in line with the polarization that mars our political landscape. Instead of criticizing and discouraging state institutions from interfering in the domain of others and standing up to anti-democratic forces it is acting as their flag-bearer. It has no sense of proportion.
It is amazing that a politician like Sheikh Rasheed on whom all the political slurs mentioned above apply and who has only one seat in Parliament which he earned courtesy of another party, is engaged by almost all the TV channels for his outlandish comments and some channels even extend the courtesy of hour-long exclusive interactions with him. People are also amazed at his audacity to make tall claims about his political character and morals, knowing well that he is a politician who has adopted a myriad of hues during his political journey.
