The Court of the People
"You blocks, you stones, you worse than senseless
things!” That’s how the crowd is berated in Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar. Many
in power continue to perceive the vast majority of ordinary people in a similar
way.
Karl Marx attempted to give back authority to what he called
the masses. A hundred years later cultural theorist, Raymond Williams,
challenged the one-size-fits-all term. He proposed “There are in fact no
masses; there are only ways of seeing people as masses”, a way of perceiving
and categorizing large groups of people, often in a negative or dismissive way,
denying their diverse natures and ability to think and make individual choices.
Today, in the age of digital sharing, people in power are challenged to contain
the extraordinary ‘ordinary’ populations into any simple category.
The powerful few have across the ages always kept a watchful
eye on the vast lower segments of society as without their support, rulers
become vulnerable, industrialists and businesses cannot succeed. Systems like democracy are presented as
channels for the public to feel part of governance, although increasingly it
feels like a placebo.
In ancient Athens, the birthplace of democracy, while Aristotle
stated that “he who loses the support of the people is a king no longer,” the
definition of the public was limited to 10 to 15 percent of the population of
free adult males who owned property. Plato
believed that society should be governed by philosopher-kings whose wisdom far
exceeded the knowledge and intellectual capabilities of the general population.
However, the general population is no longer what it was in
Plato’s time. Society has changed in unprecedented ways as people become more educated
and better informed. Populations in the digital age have access to far more
than what traditional newspapers and television programming have on offer, both
of which are restrained by those holding political or intellectual power. People
can choose their own sources of information, and the platforms for their
opinions to be heard have increased manifold with social media.
Society has always had its own mechanism of sharing
information side stepping the many control barriers. Even in the 16th
Century the Ninety-five Theses of Martin Luther, the founder of the Protestant
Reformation, took only two months to spread throughout Europe. Despite attempts to silence poets Faiz Ahmed
Faiz, Habib Jalib, and Ahmed Faraz, their verses continued to be shared by people.
Sultan Rahi’s film Maula Jatt was
banned, but became an iconic symbol in the eyes of the public and has even become
part of the Urdu lexicon.
Author of the Harry Potter Series, J.K.Rowling, was
initially rejected by no less than 12 publishing houses. Today her books have
been translated into 80 languages. The
films, Star Wars and Titanic, or even 3 Idiots, were dismissed by film critics,
but achieved cult status with fans across the world.
Impressionist and Post-Impressionist art was ridiculed by
the Art establishment, but by the mid 20th century, ordinary people were
flocking to exhibitions and Van Gogh’s Starry night is one of the highest
selling art posters for those who cannot afford to buy art. Mexican artist
Frida Kahlo was ‘discovered’ 30 years after her death becoming a strong symbol
of the feminist movement with her paintings printed on many everyday products.
Public protest can also shut down exhibitions, and the Black lives Matter led
to the removal of statues of statesman associated with slavery.
There are 5.24 billion people worldwide using social media.
Viral videos spread across the globe, some start careers in music, others
generate copycat memes across the world, such as the latest of 11-year-old
Rayyan dancing on the bow of an Indonesian
racing boat. The court of the people can also go horribly wrong. Sharing
misinformation or celebrity gossip has destroyed many lives.
Which song, or film or meme tops the charts, becomes a box
office hit, or goes viral, remains a mystery that puzzles sociologists and marketing
professionals.
Attorney Sanjay Kelly writes ‘Many states, concerned with
the power of the new medium to bring about political change, have stepped up
their efforts to control and suppress information posted online, in
increasingly sinister ways.’ Despite the tussle, we have entered an age where
people are not prepared to be led by leaders or world powers they no longer
respect.
With massive rallies held to admonish governments supporting
the genocide in Gaza, or spontaneous chants at football stadiums to support
Palestine, we are witnessing citizen advocacy at a global scale far beyond the
sixties anti-war protests. It reflects a generation that wants to become a catalyst
for positive change.
Durriya Kazi
July 28,
2025
Karachi
Comments
Post a Comment