A relatively new trend that is gaining much popularity in the Indian online journalistic media is the posting of vituperative comments anonymously. Most such comments are overtly communal in nature and support or attack a particular religion. If these comments are analysed in sufficient detail, we may suspect that there are paid writers who post comments for the sake of defending a particular party and its religious ideology.
|Some comments by one 'Ram' in the Indian Express|
Hitler and his Nazis made use of similar strategies for propaganda. Some of the most effective strategies used by the present dominant ideology in India which considers certain animals more sacred than human beings are very similar to those employed by the Nazis. For example: Posters and slogans, Anti-Semitism/antinationalism, Use of the mass media for propagating distorted truths, Mythologising the political party and its history, Projection of one individual as the only efficient leader.
The Congress had become too corrupt and inefficient without a ‘strong’ leader and India needed somebody to pull it out of the quagmire in which it had been languishing. People saw such a leader in Mr Narendra Modi in spite of his track record which carried a serious black stain in the form of the 2002 Gujarat riots. Many Muslims voted for Mr Modi thinking that the country would progress economically and technologically. The Dalits certainly voted for him. Unfortunately the Brahminic underpinnings of the Sangh Parivar have bared their claws and fangs and the very same people who supported Mr Modi are being attacked today in the name of certain holy cows.
Unfortunately the holy cows are gaining too many defenders in the mass media, particularly in the comments spaces of leading newspapers. This is a dangerous trend. It distorts history, creates new myths, spills venom on people belonging to other religious communities, and vitiates the very air of the country. It does a lot of injustice to the economically weaker sections in the country that are not able to defend their perspectives simply because they don’t have the access to such digital spaces.
What is happening in these spaces is no less perfidious than the terrorist attacks which are more conspicuous.