The Salariate, Alienation and Struggle: A pattern study of Struggle.
by Amin Zaamin Baloch
The article asserts that ‘alienation’ causes the eternal doubts on the struggle (whether it is academic or social) that makes the ground of struggle de-legitimized; thus, the struggle loses its cause or causes. In this article we will discuss two sorts of alienation, the first one occurs when the members of a certain tradition ignore or trespass the determined areas of the tradition (read Raajmaan 6th first two articles, this notion will not be discussed in this article), although, the second alienation is a collective one which is materially actualized. I proposed this struggle in academics. The article carries following main points:
- The set of salariate is hierarchical
- There are three stages of hierarchy (at least)
- The members of top’s stage have will to transfer the stratum
- Their ‘will’ ignore the open competition and produce a conflict
- Capitalism comes to cover the conflict and converts the nature of conflict
- The struggle gets engaged but internal doubts makes the struggle de-legitimized.
How do we understand the notion of salariate in our common or practical life? As I think and particularly speaking, in the context of Balochistan, the permanent salary is a sine qua non for a person, and he is ready to instrumentalize his pen to them, if they would be the source of his permanent salary, he remains always instrumental for them.This person is called salariate, and being an instrumental makes him auxiliary. In this context, the salariate always abides to be an auxiliary, and the auxiliary is gone to be a salariate.
In my previous articles, I discussed that the salariate class emerged in Balochistan as soon before the first general election in Balochistan, but in last article I tried to make narration that when salariate (uses the ethnic card) became the social authority to be a croesus, and technically preserved the individualistic freedom on the basis of a certain conception of freedom (see The Salariate and the card of Ethnicity: A Particular Study). Nowadays we can easily observe the phases in salariate class.In the top stage or phase, the croesus exercises his powers and efforts to make his position or stratum permanent, so he shares agendas to an authority which has power to make his stratum perpetuate. The second phase is covered by the fat cat; he relies on croesus, because he wishes to be willed. Finally, the pauper, who is willed to be the salariate, shares agenda with fat cat. Ultimately, the power of salariate is going to be strengthened and legitimized in our society. It has a circular notion of furtherance and alternation. However,the phases of salariate have different connotations in their practical life, but they have common desire to ‘transfer the stratum’.Moreover, the nature of the ‘transfer of stratum’ is static for croesus and it remains onrush for fat cat and pauper.
Verily, the static nature of transformation of stratum makes the conflict between elite or croesusantecedent. As I said in my previous article, the members of top-phase “are bound to produce a sharp competition for showing their powers and resources” but when they come to the point of ‘transformation of power’ they will violate their own determined decalogue.
Beside this, the process to be salariate has become the actual rung in our society. Ironically, this actual rung carries the meaning leap with the reference to success; it means beyond the actual rung, no success will be available. In the sphere of success, the croesus always either abides to be a salariate or ethnic leader.Howbeit, the pauper with the will to be salariate, makes the instrumentalization of pen as a super source, and to be auxiliary would remain his basic source to get a social rung which is objective (this rung seems to be existed to a person). In this domain, if a have-not-one is not inspired by salariate, and he is successful in any particular field, then the major task remains left for him to ‘defend’ himself against salariates. In these situations, the particular concept of alienation emerges from both sides, i.e. from salariate and non-salariate. The salariate considers ‘to remain salariate’ his survival, and on contrary the non-salariate accounts ‘to defend himself’ his mode of survival. Conclusively, the have-not-one remains consciously ready to defend his every action which would be hit by salariate. On the other hand, the salariate croesus for preserving his permanent stratum, tries to keep someone subaltern, although the fat cat shares his every single agenda to croesus and proudly verifies his phase to be subaltern. Successively, the pauper adjusts his actions to fat cat or croesus, and wait for appreciations. As whole, the salariate substantiates the grounds of being ‘auxiliary’. In short, the croesus, fat cat and pauper replace their existence to the phase or stratum of ‘salariate’; and the have-not-one replaces his existence to ‘defence’. This conscious replacement of existence of is called ‘alienation’.
However, the very mode of croesus does not only preserve his permanent stratum but he wills to transfer it to a person who supposed to be the member of same stage where the croesus exercises his power. He thinks his wish has to be willed, and he supposes that it is only price which covers his services. Successively, his concerning action makes his alienation aggressive. This static wish or aggressive alienation causes the violation of open competition that irks a conflict between the local members of top-phase. Basically, the open competition deteriorates their wish, technically this deterioration of wish remains a source of resistance, but they never cast doubt on it internally, because it would be sorted out when the external member of a top-phase comes to grasp the control. In short, first, the Ceasarism occurs between local members of croesus, then the external croesus comes to get the control over the local hierarchy.Secondly, the Ceasarism comes to clash among locals and externals. However, the real fruitfulness goes to those powers that remain aware about every action of salariateand salariate croesus is responsible to share every single agenda to them.
Ultimately, the conflict makes situations uneven, so economically capitalism and socially neo-liberal remain only setups to tackle the unevenness and convert the local and ethnic into market conflict. Conclusively, we would face two dangerous outcomes. Firstly, the have-not-one not only would defend himself against local salariates but to external ones too, he would remain pressured to build a more strong narration to defend himself. Secondly, Balochistan wouldn’t have any production, but it remains a market only, practically external production with relative values would be accommodated in Balochistan. As a consequence, a collective alienation corrupts the social and economic grounds of Balochistan actually. Unfortunately, I am observing the initial degree of these dangerous situations.Here salariates and have-not-one, both of them, want to get freedom from social ground i.e. tradition and want to get out of actual ground i.e. Balochistan.
Practically, the alienation is privileged in our society, if a person comes to trace the alienation and tries to struggle for demolishing it.Unfortunately, he never finds a credible company which would develop a platform for sustaining the struggle. In-case, a form of struggle emerges then it will lose its foundations in initial stage because of internal doubts. As I propose that for making any struggle sustained we have to get entered into the flow of tradition, because the alienated action will never produce a collective meaning.