top of page

"US VS THEM" -MAJORITIES & MINORITIES..

In India today, there is a narrative that seeks to widen the gulf between the country’s majorities and the minorities.

The rising incidents of majoritarian violence as identity-based, populist politics dominate the country’s landscape. Indeed, in many parts of the world, democratic societies are becoming increasingly polarised in an “Us vs. Them” landscape that cuts across political and religious lines. It is this “making” of offense that is exacerbating communal tensions and dividing an already polarised polity along religious lines.

 

The main objective of hate  is met when the support base is widened, a divisive narrative is created, and people are mobilised around a political agenda. The media, meanwhile, are caught in reporting incidents when they happen, or else inadvertently serving as a vehicle for politicians who use hate speech as a tool for identity politics. In the process, the media often lose sight of the manufactured quality of hate spin, especially where the line between hate speech and free speech are blurred.

 

While there may be differences in scale and location, many Indian Muslims argue that this “Otherisation” is not an overnight phenomenon but a slow process adopted and then maximized by the political parties. It first distanced physically, then alienated mentally and is now demonising emotionally.

 

Vitiated, ideologically polarised and aggressive politics is fast becoming a cauldron of victimhood and rage with both political patronage and police sanction that allow such hate crimes to take place with impunity. Hatred and violence are certainly not the domain only of the majority, but India’s over 70% strong population, with their sheer numbers, have the power to spread narratives that paint minorities as the ones who are against them.

 

Without a clear legal framework to address hate speech and hate crimes in India, what is potentially today the largest, daily criminal activity in the country goes virtually unchallenged and unpunished. Violence perpetrated and condoned by the majority. The Indian government’s own data, collected by the National Crime Records Bureau indicates that the number of incidents of communal violence went up by 41 percent in a three-year-period from 336 cases in 2014 to 475 cases in 2016.  The BJP-ruled states of Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh, recorded the most numbers.

India needs to bell the proverbial cat, and accept the potential dangers of growing majoritarian violence in order to address it and preserve the country’s fundamental freedoms to recognize and maintain India’s peace and stability.

Violence based on ideology—be it religious, political or cultural—that leads to fanaticism and potential violence, it is hard to miss the signs. The climate of pervasive, vitriolic hate on social media that feeds on insecurity and persecution of the majority, that allows and encourages hateful language and behaviour, and condones violence against those who take positions contrary to theirs.

This has posed a complex challenge to India’s social fabric: one that is premised on the nation’s intrinsic, national values of tolerance and diversity. These faultlines, it may be said, lay dormant for long, only to erupt in recent years and finally crack open years of constitutionally bound principles of political and religious freedoms, freedom of speech, and tolerance towards diversity.

Artists and creative voices, educators and community elders, celebrities who represent values of patriotism and not hyper-nationalism, need to find safe spaces that allow extreme views to interact with each other in the hope of fostering dialogue and peace. 

 

In a socially networked world where comment is free and reactions are instant, lines between violent personal abuse and/or speech inciting violence against a community or group are becoming increasingly blurred. At times, even if intent and language are not explicitly hateful, the implications can be. Countering one form of violence and terror cannot take place at the cost of allowing another.  

ReplyForward

bottom of page