|
Introduction:
In the first part Dr Qadir identified the position
of intellectuals in a world controlled by power. He
explained how intellectuals often become targets of
power. Those who have power can use wealth or force
to attain everything and anything they want apart
from knowledge and intellectuality. That is why they
use money and power to buy and humiliate
intellectuals. Dr Qadir insists that intellectuals
have higher moral and eternal historical position
than people in power, therefore they do need to sell
themselves: their conscience, and hire out their pen
to oppressive powers. Selling oneself is the easiest
thing to do, while becoming an intellectual is not
such an easy vocation.
In this part of his article, which he has entitled:
Who is an intellectual?, Dr Qadir tries to elaborate
on this point and define the task and
characteristics of intellectuals from his point of
view. He defines the first and foremost
characteristic of the intellectual as his “ critical
approach linked to creation of new ideas and trends.
The intellectuals involvement in society and its
problems and expressing them in every possible
visual and audio forms, is his greatest weapon for
the advancement of society.” The intellectual cannot
be separated from the moral values and
characteristic actions that define him as an
intellectual. Although Dr Qadir has two academic
qualifications (PhD) he does not even consider
literacy as a condition of making one an
intellectual. It is more to do with intention,
mission and action. Any one who has a new vision to
improve the conditions of society and serve mankind
and makes it his mission to work for this without
expecting rewards and financial gain is an
intellectual. That is why specialists and experts
cannot be intellectuals if their work is merely for
material gain without having an effective social
role.
When first I wrote about Dr Qadir, I described his
action as “Socratic”. Then I had not read his
articles and his other articles in Kurdish. I just
used this adjective on the basis of his action and
approach. This article, especially his description
of the characteristics and role of intellectuals,
reinforces the appropriateness of my description of
Dr Qadir’s intellectual intervention in the politics
of Kurdistan. In this article he refers twice to
Aristotle. It is in fact the Aristotelian definition
of intellectuals that inspires him most. He writes:
The intellectual spends all his efforts and toils
for public interest rather than private gain. To
become an intellectual is, in Aristotle’s words, to
reach the highest moral position.
Morality and moral values are tested in practice, in
attitudes and in the ultimate test whether an
intellectual is willing not only to say the truth
but also to investigate and articulate it and to
sacrifice for saying it.
Dr Qadir then comes to the specific issue that he
wants to tackle in his article and tries to find
answers to why Kurdish intellectuals, some reputable
ones who spend a lifetime to establish their
reputation and popularity, are so willing to sell
their souls and conscience to corrupt political
parties. His answer is that they do it for financial
gain. As theft and corruption make dominant Kurdish
parties richer and richer, they are able and willing
to pay more and more to buy the intellectuals. Dr
Qadir makes an interesting comparison. Buying any
intellectual for a political party is like forcing a
military force to surrender to them.
Dr Qadir is pessimistically realistic. He does not
find anything wrong with intellectuals being
affiliated to political parties provided that they
do not lose the characteristics of their
intellectual identity: being critical, omitted to
people and moral values and searching for and saying
the truth. But he realistically find that an
impossible scenario as Kurdish political parties are
too backward, tribal and truth-hating to allow an
intellectual, even though member of the party, to be
critical and striving to say the truth. The gentle
and sensitive nature of Dr Qadir shows itself in his
last line when he says how sad he was when he had to
delete another known Kurdish intellectual who having
being bought by a political party lost his
intellectual status to become a party political
technocrat.
Power and intellectuals in Kurdistan By Dr Kamal
Said Qadir
Translated by Dr Kamal Mirawdeli
Part II
Who is an intellectual?
Intellectuality is not an element born with people.
A person, to become an intellectual, fulfils a
number of conditions. When he loses these conditions
he also loses his status as an intellectual.
An intellectual, in addition to having a talent,
which he can express through writing, speaking or
any sort of representation, he also embodies some
specific characteristics, which cannot be observed
in every one.
The first characteristic of the intellectual is
critical approach linked to creation of new ideas
and trends. The intellectual’s involvement in
society and its problems and expressing them in
every possible visual and audio forms, is his
greatest weapon for the advancement of society. To
achieve this task it is not conditional that a
person should even be literate. The important thing
is that he has a mission and works to communicate
his mission. And his mission can be nothing but to
serve humanity and struggle for the liberation of
man from slavery, humiliation and oppression in all
its forms. That is why it is not surprising that
genuine intellectuals are always in conflict with
the systems of dictatorship and oppression. The
intellectual spends all his efforts and toils for
public interest rather than private gain. To become
an intellectual is, in Aristotle’s words, to reach
the highest moral position.
Every intellectual, however high the level of his
intellectuality may be, will lose his identity as an
intellectual if he loses the values and
characteristics that define him as an intellectual.
Then he may become a technocrat, an expert or a
craftsman.
In this respect, Edward Said says: The intellectual
is a person who has his own specific role in society
which cannot be played by a specialist person
because the intellectual represents those ideas and
approaches in society which are usually covered up.
Thus, what differentiates an intellectual from a
specialist is his role in society.
On this point, the leftist Italian writer Antonio
Gramsci says: The difference between the
intellectual and the specialist depends on their
roles in society. The intellectual dedicates all his
efforts and abilities for the service of society
without expecting any reward, but a specialist is a
person who expects reward and gain from his work.
Then the difference between a writer and someone who
writes an application letter, between an artist and
a building master, between a poet and a commercial
singer, between a painter and a carpenter, is merely
the fact that the first group do what they do for
the service of society while the second aims at
financial gain.
Another important characteristic of the intellectual
is the investigation and expression of truth. In
this respect, the American writer Noam Chomsky says:
An intellectual must always say the truth and expose
lies. When the intellectual turns a blind eye to the
mistakes and crimes of power, he will become a
partner in these crimes.
That is why although an intellectual may have a life
full of trouble and pain, but he still owns an
immense power within his society.
[The French philosopher] Jean-Jacques Rousseau says:
Those people who control people’s thinking are in
fact controlling their lives.
So, when an intellectual owns such an immense power
and position in society, what should push him to
exchange this high position for a low place in the
salons of power?
Why do Kurdish writers sell themselves?
Concerning the phenomenon of Kurdish intellectual
pens hiring themselves out, I believe the greatest
factor behind this is financial gain because this
phenomenon has increased with the phenomenon of
unprecedented accumulation of wealth by the two main
parties through theft and corruption. If this is not
the case, why don’t the smaller Kurdish parties some
of which have made so many sacrifices that they have
been reduced to a scroll, inspire those
‘intellectuals’?
It is not that this fact is hidden from the two main
political parties. From their point of view, when an
intellectual approaches them it is like a soldier
from a rival army surrendering to them, because
intellectuals and authorities are in constant war.
Surrender has its own terms ad conditions. The first
is that the [surrendering] person must first declare
that he has surrendered. A soldier does this in the
battle by raising his hands. Instead of raising his
hands, the intellectual must first start praising
the symbols and figures of power in the media and
dedicate his pen as a servile tool of praise and
applause. Then he can get his rewards: packets of
stolen fresh dollars, deeds of plots of land, jobs,
etc. But he will not receive all these in one go:
this happens stealthily on the basis of the hiring
contract, that is, according to the service the
intellectual offers to his political sponsors. Thus
all the process is a provisional contract and power
can at any time discharge the services of his
intellectual agent.
Here the intellectual makes a great permanent
sacrifice for some provisional financial gains. By
hiring out his pen, the intellectual loses his high
moral position within society. Some become
technocrats. There were some poets who were so
popular in some periods that people viewed them as
prophets, but after getting involved with power they
lost all their reputation. Whatever they write now
is no more than some feeble decorated words that
have no mission and no soul.
Thus what they have built with toil and effort in
tens of years of vigilance and sacrifice, they gave
away cheaply.
It is true that an intellectual can be affiliated to
a political party and at the same time remain as an
intellectual. But this is possible provided that he
does not lose his intellectual characteristics. This
means he has to remain truthful and assess the
events with a critical eye. In other words, the
affiliation of the intellectual to a political party
must be no more than a tactical step aiming at
utilizing politics to communicate his own
humanitarian mission. But I do not believe that
either of the two main political parties in
Kurdistan can tolerate paying someone from their won
ranks to criticize them because they can get this
from non-party political intellectuals free of
charge.
I was very sad when in the last few days I had to
cross over the name of another intellectual and have
changed his title from an intellectual to a
technocrat. Now I have even forgotten his name.
Source:
www.kurdistanreferendum.org
Top |
®
