The Labor of Leisure

It was recently announced by the Minister of Science and Technology Fawad Chaudhary that a special program of animation and videogames would be launched to encourage young people to be part of the large and lucrative global gaming industry. This is an excellent initiative because it could encourage our youth to help drive Pakistan’s economic growth, and diversify our economic base, while also encouraging a more creative polity. There are in fact many ways in which the government can assist in fostering this nascent industry, whether through efforts and investments in coordination, certification, training, co-production, and simply encouragement.

For all the parental cynicism that might accompany such an endeavor, our society must realize that videogames are no trifling matter. They represent a global industry worth more than $150 billion dollars, growing at 10-12% per annum, that has more than doubled in market value over the past decade. The industry employs millions of people worldwide, with more than 2.5 lakh videogame jobs in the US alone, many of whom represent the creative crème de la crème of a generation. As more and more people connect with digital platforms, videogames are taking an ever greater share of consumer spending, and are likely to become one of the most lucrative economic sectors in the next few decades, beyond what they already represent as a juggernaut industry. Employment in this sector is growing at 3% per annum in the US alone, and the coronavirus pandemic has led to both a surge in global demand for consuming videogames, as well as a rise in job opportunities to cater to that demand.

To diversify our economy into such a sector represents very intelligent thinking insofar as we yearn to become a 21st century economy. The banality of our economic outputs, which is essentially bed linens and mangos, is a national embarrassment, and can be seen in our low rankings in rubrics such as the MIT Atlas of Economic Complexity. For a country of 210 million people, Pakistan ranks as the 66th largest export economy in the world, and has a paltry 87th rank in terms of complexity, according to the Economic Complexity Index (ECI). If we are to sell bath towels and rice for another century, we shouldn’t expect to get very far in an era where a global creative class will command the greatest premium on economic capital.

Videogames are one of the most compelling industries in terms of the usage and creation of intellectual capital today. This is because they are (at least in the best cases) premised on powerful narratives, engaging story-telling, and cooperative strategies. These are some of the most important traits of humans as a distinct species, and represent skills central to our evolutionary success. Videogames do not simply reflect these prosocial traits of our species, they also foster and inculcate these skills in a flowering new generation, and that too in an enjoyable and leisured setting.

Therefore, it is important to break from a conservative middle-class mindset that imposes strictures that brutalize leisure (both in videogames and other mediums), given that it is both a powerful economic driver and a sociocultural priority. Leisure should be at the forefront of a modern economic strategy for any nation. Several recent publications have highlighted how many of man’s greatest innovations emerged simply through leisurely and curious pursuits. For example, Steven Johnson’s Wonderland: How Play Made the Modern World is an excellent exploration of how novelty and wonder was always a powerful engine of technological advancement through the centuries.

Beyond this, the cultural theorist Geert Hofstede, whose matrix is one of the most cited frameworks for understanding national cultures, actually includes the attitude of a society towards leisure as one of its 6 core dimensions, as captured by the dichotomy of “indulgent vs. restrained.” By indulgent, it is meant that a society “allows relatively free gratification of basic and natural human drives related to enjoying life and having fun,” while a restrained society is one that “suppresses gratification of needs and regulates it by means of strict social norms.”

As one might be tempted to surmise, Pakistan veers towards being a very restrained society. Yet even longstanding local observers might find it surprising that Pakistan gets a score of zero in this category, i.e. it is the quintessentially repressed polity. However, we must then contend with the repercussions of an anti-leisure ethos of repression, whether in the form of a large youth bulge that is constantly at the mercy of extremist thoughts and messages, or in the form of a substance abuse epidemic in our educational institutions that we cannot muster the courage to even mention.

Hofstede himself warns that the restrained society exhibits a pervasive “tendency towards cynicism and pessimism.“ Such an assessment would be entirely appropriate for a society like ours. Not only is it a case of society brutalizing one’s individuality, it is also a case of myopic economic policy. The sheer merits of encouraging economic diversity through creative channels is the sort of strategy a society needs in the 21st century to assure prosperity. There is an unassailable economic case to encourage a large youth cohort to engage with creative outlets such as videogames, and not just as a consumer, but as a producer within the global creative class.

As such, the youth of this country can become producers of real material value through the development of a vibrant videogame industry. The government’s announced efforts to assist in developing this sector are a welcome initiative, as it can help our youth to shape narratives, engage other societies, and compete and cooperate to develop compelling and lasting works in an eminent medium of leisure. This will allow them to channel their energies towards innovation, while also earning lucrative wages and building up a sector that is emblematic of the world economy going forward.

Above all, the economic merits of developing a videogame sector should be recognized as a means towards fostering a more creative and introspective polity. The creative mind is not beset by the burdens of navigating the world by conforming to the mechanical approbation of others. Rather, it seeks to dream up new worlds, and then see those worlds made manifest through ambition, effort, and toil. That is both the leisure of labour, and the labour of leisure.

The writer is the Director for Economics and National Affairs at the Centre for Aerospace and Security Studies (CASS). The article was first published in  THE NATION. He can be reached at [email protected].


Share this article

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Recent Publications

Browse through the list of recent publications.

The Cover-up: IAF Narrative of the May 2025 Air Battle

Even after one year since the India-Pakistan May war of 2025, the Indian discourse regarding Operation Sindoor remains uncertain under its pretence of restraint. The Pahalgam attack on 22 April, which killed 26 people, triggered an escalatory spiral. New Delhi quickly accused Pakistan-linked elements, while Islamabad refuted the allegation and demanded an independent investigation. On 7 May, India launched attacks deep inside Pakistan under what it later termed as Operation Sindoor. The political motive was intended to turn the crisis into coercive signalling by shifting the blame onto the enemy and projecting a sense of military superiority.
This episode, however, began to fray immediately as war seldom follows the intended script. Within minutes PAF shot down 7 IAF aircraft including 4 Rafales. On 8 May, Reuters reported that at least two Indian aircraft were shot down by a Pakistani J-10C, while the local government sources reported other aircraft crashes in Indian-occupied Jammu and Kashmir

Read More »

Why the IAF’s Post-Sindoor Spending Surge is a Sign of Panic

After Operation Sindoor, India is spending billions of dollars on new weapons. This is being taken by many people as an indication of military prowess. It is not. This rush to procure weapons is in fact an acknowledgement that the Air Force in India had failed to do what it was meant to do. The costly jets and missiles that India had purchased over the years failed to yield the promised results.

Sindoor was soon followed by India in sealing the gaps which the operation had exposed. It was reported that Indian Air Force (IAF) is looking to speed up its purchases of more than 7 billion USD. This will involve other Rafale fighter jets with India already ordering 26 more Rafales to the Navy in 2024 at an estimated cost of about 3.9 billion USD. India is also seeking long-range standoff missiles, Israeli loitering munitions and increased drone capabilities. Special financial powers of the Indian military were activated to issue emergency procurement orders. The magnitude and rate of these purchases speak volumes.

Indian media and defence analysts have over the years considered the Rafale as a game changer. When India purchased 36 Rafales aircrafts at an approximate cost of 8.7 billion USD, analysts vowed that the aircraft would provide India with air superiority over Pakistan. Operation Sindoor disproved all those allegations. Indian aircraft did not even fly in Pakistani airspace when the fighting started. India solely depended on standoff weapons that were launched at a safe distance. The air defence system of Pakistan, comprising of the HQ-9 surface-to-air missile system and its own fighters, stood its ground.

Read More »

May 2025: Mosaic Warfare and the Myth of Centralised Air Power

Visualise a modern-day Air Force commander sitting in the operations room, miles away from the combat zone, overseeing every friendly and enemy aircraft and all assets involved in the campaign. In a split second, he can task a fighter, reposition a drone, and authorise a strike. In today’s promising technological era, he does not even need an operations room; a laptop on his desktop will suffice. The situation looks promising as it offers efficiency, precision, and control. The term used for such operational control is ‘centralisation’, which has been made possible with advanced networking, integrating space, cyber, surveillance, artificial intelligence, and seamless communication, enabling a single commander to manage an entire campaign from a single node. Centralised command and control, championed by the Western air forces and then adopted by many others, has thus been seen as a pinnacle of modern military power.
The concept of centralisation, enabled by state-of-the-art networking, may seem promising, but it is nothing more than a myth.

Read More »