HEROISM is evident in both education and broader social learning in Pakistan. Curricula and textbooks, our political culture, television debates and social media discourse all glorify personalities. But excessive emphasis on a hero oversimplifies history and conceals structural issues and collective contributions, training young minds to believe that only exceptional individuals achieve progress. This creates passive citizenship, personality cults and a dependence on ‘saviours’, resulting in declining respect for institutions and democratic participation, and weakening gradual social reform. No wonder students stay away from social movements, institutional processes and public participation. Consequently, the contributions of ordinary citizens towards transforming societies are reduced. They see history as an outcome of struggles led by charismatic figures rather than the social actions of many.
In addition to formal education, wider social learning reinforces the same heroic standards. The media, including digital platforms, carry political messaging that elevates individuals to the status of reformers. Social media surveys often ask whether a particular personality can save the country. It is more beneficial to invite opinions regarding the effectiveness of policies, institutions and accountability.
Our political space revolves around the cult of heroic political leaders. The political process and social reformation become secondary. In fact, political parties have rarely been democratic about electing their leaders. Decision-making within them rests with one person. Political parties eventually become vulnerable as responsibilities are not shared, successors are not prepared, and duties are distributed unequally.
Our social learning and interaction in any form, including social media, replicate the same hero-centric tradition. Even the smallest feat is presented as an extraordinary breakthrough in the digital sphere. From taking a photograph with a famous person at an airport lounge to making a routine official visit — everything is magnified. Social media favours personalities because individuals are easier to promote than systems — a photograph of an individual gets more attention than debates about reform, educational transformation, public finance or administrative procedures. However, real progress is achieved through these less glamorous processes.
Individuals are easier to promote than systems.
Where success is attributed entirely to the hero, failure is blamed solely on the villain. The blame for Pakistan’s structural problems, financial crises and organisational failures is pinned on individuals, and not weak regulations, poor implementation, inadequate capacity and lack of incentives. Systems improve only when problems are analysed with honesty, responsibilities are shared, and lessons are retained beyond the tenure of particular people.
Education can play a central role in changing this mindset as well as in controlling the phenomenon. What we need to do is to revisit our curricula to frame them within a broader social and institutional context so that learners are acquainted with the chronology of momentous events, the formulation of legislation, the evolution of institutions, and the contribution of communities towards change.
Our educational institutions must teach leadership as the ability to strengthen the system rather than dominate it. They must also teach that a true leader emerges in times of crises, creates hope, delegates responsibilities, develops able successors, and establishes procedures that continue after his or her de-parture.
The media, an ef-fective tool of mass education, can also contribute by focusing less on personality-driven narratives and more on policy, institutional performance and measurable outcomes. It should ask not only who made a certain announcement but also whether the relevant institution has the capacity to implement it. It has to examine whether reforms are documented, funded, monitored and sustained.
Our education system must transform learners into demanding citizens who are able to analyse leadership behaviour in terms of contribution, and be cautious of those who repeatedly portray themselves as the only solution. They must be taught that no society can rely permanently on exceptional personalities. Institutions, when properly developed, can outlast any change. Therefore, learners should know that a person who claims that nothing can function without him or her is weakening the institution instead of strengthening it.
The purpose of education, in any form, should not be to produce citizens who wait for a hero or a saviour but to produce citizens who understand systems, participate in institutions, share responsibility and participate in collective progress.
The writer is an educationist.
Published in Dawn, August 19th, 2026
