Noam Chomsky is one of the leading peace workers in the world. In the wake of America’s attack on Vietnam, he brought out his classic formulation, ‘manufacturing consent’. The phrase explains the state manipulating public opinion to have the public approve of it policies—in this case, the attack of the American state on Vietnam, which was then struggling to free itself from French colonial rule.
In India, we are witness to manufactured hate against religious minorities. This hatred serves to enhance polarisation in society, which undermines India’s democracy and Constitution and promotes support for a Hindu nation. Hate is being manufactured through multiple mechanisms. For example, it manifests in violence against religious minorities. Some recent ghastly expressions of this manufactured hate was the massive communal violence witnessed in Mumbai (1992-93), Gujarat (2002), Kandhamal (2008) and Muzaffarnagar (2013). Its other manifestation was in the form of lynching of those accused of having killed a cow or consumed beef. A parallel phenomenon is the brutal flogging, often to death, of Dalits who deal with animal carcasses or leather.
Yet another form of this was seen when Shambhulal Regar, indoctrinated by the propaganda of Hindu nationalists, burned alive Afrazul Khan and shot the video of the heinous act. For his brutality, he was praised by many. Regar was incited into the act by the propaganda around love jihad. Lately, we have the same phenomenon of manufactured hate taking on even more dastardly proportions as youth related to Hindu nationalist organisations have been caught using pistols, while police authorities look on.
Anurag Thakur, a BJP minster in the central government recently incited a crowd in Delhi to complete his chant of what should happen to ‘traitors of the country...” with a “they should be shot”. Just two days later, a youth brought a pistol to the site of a protest at Jamia Millia Islamia university and shouted “take Azaadi!” and fired it. One bullet hit a student of Jamia. This happened on 30 January, the day Nathuram Godse had shot Mahatma Gandhi in 1948. A few days later, another youth fired near the site of protests against the CAA and NRC at Shaheen Bagh. Soon after, he said that in India, “only Hindus will rule”.
What is very obvious is that the shootings by those associated with Hindu nationalist organisations are the culmination of a long campaign of spreading hate against religious minorities in India in general and against Muslims in particular. The present phase is the outcome of a long and sustained hate campaign, the beginning of which lies in nationalism in the name of religion; Muslim nationalism and Hindu nationalism. This sectarian nationalism picked up the communal view of history and the communal historiography which the British introduced in order to pursue their ‘divide and rule’ policy.
In India what became part of “social common sense” was that Muslim kings had destroyed Hindu temples, that Islam was spread by force, and that it is a foreign religion, and so on. Campaigns, such as the one for a temple dedicated to the Hindu god Rama to be built at the site where the Babri masjid once stood, further deepened the idea of a Muslim as a “temple-destroyer”. Aurangzeb, Tipu Sultan and other Muslim kings were tarnished as the ones who spread Islam by force in the subcontinent. The tragic Partition, which was primarily due to British policies, and was well-supported by communal streams also, was entirely attributed to Muslims. The Kashmir conflict, which is the outcome of regional, ethnic and other historical issues, coupled with the American policy of supporting Pakistan’s ambitions of regional hegemony, (which also fostered the birth of Al-Qaeda), was also attributed to the Muslims.
With recurring incidents of communal violence, these falsehoods went on going deeper into the social thinking. Violence itself led to ghettoisation of Muslims and further broke inter-community social bonds. On the one hand, a ghettoised community is cut off from others and on the other hand the victims come to be presented as culprits. The percolation of this hate through word-of-mouth propaganda, media and re-writing of school curricula, had a strong impact on social attitudes towards the minorities.
In the last couple of decades, the process of manufacturing hate has been intensified by the social media platforms which are being cleverly used by the communal forces. Swati Chaturvedi’s book, I Am a Troll: Inside the Secret World of the BJP’s Digital Army, tells us how the BJP used social media to spread hate. Whatapp University became the source of understanding for large sections of society and hate for the ‘Other’, went up by leaps and bounds. To add on to this process, the phenomenon of fake news was shrewdly deployed to intensify divisiveness.
Currently, the Shaheen Bagh movement is a big uniting force for the country; but it is being demonised as a gathering of ‘anti-nationals’. Another BJP leader has said that these protesters will indulge in crimes like rape. This has intensified the prevalent hate.
While there is a general dominance of hate, the likes of Shambhulal Regar and the Jamia shooter do get taken in by the incitement and act out the violence that is constantly hinted at. The deeper issue involved is the prevalence of hate, misconceptions and biases, which have become the part of social thinking.
These misconceptions are undoing the amity between different religious communities which was built during the freedom movement. They are undoing the fraternity which emerged with the process of India as a nation in the making. The processes which brought these communities together broadly drew from Gandhi, Bhagat Singh and Ambedkar. It is these values which need to be rooted again in the society. The communal forces have resorted to false propaganda against the minorities, and that needs to be undone with sincerity.
Combating those foundational misconceptions which create hatred is a massive task which needs to be taken up by the social organisations and political parties which have faith in the Indian Constitution and values of freedom movement. It needs to be done right away as a priority issue in with a focus on cultivating Indian fraternity yet again.
Comments
I was surprised with these people who run educational institutions since long, and the management not understand the rights of Muslims women, that is also simple wearing scarf as it is a moral and religious rightrs of muslim women,and girls, it covers the chastity and aura of a girl ,a mother , and as well all women, but why these nuns are discriminating with muslim community only, by the way why they cannot work without their scrafs inside school or college, Every muslim women is a spiritually religious to wear scraf or cover the chastity with the scarf ..complare to few nuns only wear scarfs since it is their religious rights.
I am asking the management of college to settle the matter peacefully .
No one is abusing her, but for the decision what she has taken is just showing her personality whether she is a angel or simply a common woman who is making a religious chaos between two Community. Respect each others community is what we learn from from Masjid and Church. But here this is going some other way.need to stop before the situation is worsened
I request all the muslim students to wear the same dress what the madam is wearing - problem solved..
Angle......... my foot!!!...if man can become angle then i would have been the first...
Shocked to read brainless comments from Muslims. Muslims cannot build an institution like St Agnes College in Mangalore. But they talk about their rights in Christian and Hindu managed colleges. What a tragedy. May Allah grant good sense to Muslims so that they realize their foolishness.
Never expected such a drity mind set opinion form a religious preacher. She can wear full hijab and Muslim students not permitted. It is well clear to understand what time of human being she is and what is her intention.
Check her passport how many times she visited isreal
Dear Management
When you are implementing any rule's, it should be such that you should be following it. If your principal herself is wearing then how ethical is that to stop the students wearing it.
Hijab is for to cover the modesty and not for exposing.!! Please respect each others propsective.
Sr Dr M Jeswina AC is not a divine woman. She is an angel. Those who mock her must be extremists or anti-social elements.
One more Threat for Indian Democracy by the Principal of St. Agnes College Mangalore, Sr Dr M Jeswina AC.
If the Principal can wear the Scarf, then why Shouldn’t the Students.
Again why its Double standard and what is the Method behind this policy.
Common, once again we all indian’s should BIGOT this policy of St Agnes College Mangalore.
i donno hu ur. but i felt ur comment on the issue of head scarf as funny. as hijab for men and women is farl or compulsory den u need to follow it. to be a citizen of a country u must follow the rules of that country. similarly if u want to be a muslim u need to follow the rules of islam. otherwise u r not called one.u can say that islam is in heart need not show in hijab. when imaan is in heart then definitly hijab will be der otherwise u need to check ur imaan not alter the rules of islam.
Principal Mam can wear fully covered headscarf. But students (muslim) can't...
Dear All
this is the height of hypochracy ..... she herself opt for it , and say you dont wear it ???// in Quran its mentioned ..''Do not preach unless you follow it ''
Dear Sister Dr. Jeswina
How can You prevent and take this decision being in a headscarf? Interestingly you preach this and practice proudly and roam around the world wearing such dress code which you and your institutions are opposing other community. May I ask you on behalf of society with all due respect to your valuable service to the education, what kind of justification you are putting forward to media and seeing students attend classes ignoring their constitutional demand. Dear Sister, will you implement and make it mandatory same rules for students who are wearing a similar dress which you are into? If not this approach will be called communalism or fascism (Sorry for using such words).
Dear Principal, Institutions are not at all allowed to restrict a students religious practice at any place inside the campus. In front of the constitution your college rules will fall down and your college rules should be modified. Look at the hypocrisy you are playing with the students. You will enter the class with your scarf on. And you want a particular community student to remove it? What kind of justice it is.No education institutions are even allowed to impose uniform system for students. We condemn your act. Just don't drag this issue more, please behave mature
Catholic run schools and colleges always do like this.
I am not sure whether there is male teacher in this college, if yes, then the women have right to observe hijab inside the classroom as well. No rules is bigger than the personal right guaranteed to individuals living in India. If this principal mam have right to observe her personal hijab inside her cabin, then Muslim women also should be given their rights.
easy solution, let Muslim students accepts the principal madam dress code, in this matter, let it teacher will be role model for students, accept it
dear college management and student,
as soon as i saw people discussing and sharing the views regarding the ban of women scarf in the college auditorium, i too wants to share some views and ideas related to this. as far as college rules and regulation is concern ban of scarf is acceptable. but if we follow the rules and regulation of my lord it is unacceptable.
student should first contact pricipal regarding whatever issues they. and it the liability of the management to solve the issue in favour of the student because whatever issue they are raising it is the issue to uplift the women rather degrading. hoping the maangemnt to solve the issue in favour of student.
In Islam, men have an obligation to God and to women to observe hijab. I imagine a conversation between someone teaching the Quran and a guy as follows:
Teacher: Don’t stare at women.
Guy: But she’s wearing revealing clothing!
Teacher: Why are you staring? Stop.
Guy: But it’s revealing.
Teacher: Why-are-you-staring?
Guy: Uh…
It’s that simple.
If a guy chooses to accept Islam, Islam says he must observe hijab. The Prophet Muhammad’s directives further affirm this view. He admonished men, “Be chaste yourselves, and women will be chaste as well,” again putting the primary burden of hijab on men.
This point was again illustrated when the Prophet rode with his companion Al Fadl bin Abbas. A woman described as strikingly beautiful approached the Prophet to seek his guidance on some religious matters. Al Fadl began to stare at her because of her beauty.
Noting this, the Prophet Muhammad did not scold the woman for dressing immodestly or revealing her beauty. Instead, he “reached his hand backwards, catching Al Fadl’s chin, and turned his face to the other side so that he would not gaze at her”. Thus, the Prophet Muhammad once more established that the primary burden to observe hijab rests on men.
Ughhhhh. Individual choice yes. But college has certain rules. You don't want to follow the rules, you don't join that particular college. Also, Islam is a very beautiful religion. Let's not make it all about the Hijab.
All students (irrespective of religion) should obey collage or school rule.
missionary school management are allowing sisters to wear their dress similar to Principal dress but they are restricted to hijab.
There is no comparison between student and principle..
Rules are only followed by the students.
Prici mam… whatever u are wearing is a perfect Hijab in Islam. Kindly allow Muslim girls also to wear the same in classroom.
Hahahahhah.. what a pic!!!! She can wear headscarf but Muslim students can’t wear!!!
Add new comment