Recently, a disturbing trend has emerged worldwide, where politicians are increasingly resorting to anti-Islamism as a tool for political gains. This dangerous strategy entails the deliberate use of hate speech to appeal certain demographics. While this phenomenon of is not new by itself but its repercussions due to increased globalization and technological advancement have exposed the alarming nexus of populism, exploitation of religious sentiments and politics.
Freedom of speech is a fundamental right; it is essential to recognize its delicate balance with hate speech. Hate speech goes beyond expressing opinions and promotes discrimination, aggression, and vehemence. The challenge here lies in differentiating between genuine critique and deliberate spiteful rhetoric that seeks marginalization and vilification.
In this background, the rise of anti-Islamism is often entangled with the broader wave of populism. Populism is a political maneuver where leaders portray themselves as the savior of the public due to their charismatic personalities and strong appeal. Such a tactic is successful in times of uncertainty and social change when the public is fearing a perceived or real threat. Hence the populist leaders seek to capitalize on societal discontent to exploit public divisions for consolidating prestige and influence.
Europe, in particular, has witnessed the rise of far-right parties leveraging anti-Islamic sentiments to gain popularity. England and France have been on the news for their anti-immigration policies, banning of headscarf and halal lunch options in schools to hate crimes killing Muslims.
Muslims in Norway too have experienced hate crimes, blasphemous actions and the ridicule of their Holy Book. However, one of the latest developments that has highlighted the need to understand the cashing on anti-Islam for political gains has been the winning of Geert Wilders in Netherland elections. Being protected by police custody for over twenty years for his anti-Islam statements, Wilders’ himself was in a shock after his election victory as clearly seen by his expressions in a video that surfaced on his social media.
Wilders has been a controversial figure often making insensitive anti Islam and anti-immigration comments. Wilders, who once called Moroccans as ‘scums’ and was denied entry in UK for showcasing his seventeen minutes film ‘fitna’ to ridicule the Muslim holy book, has been receiving congratulations from far- right parties throughout Europe. His election success has on the other has spread chaos and worries among the Dutch Muslims.
While the highlight of Wilders success is disturbing and reminds about the power of narratives in the age of social media, yet the dangers arising from the increased use of hate speech for the Muslims especially in Europe are dire.
Politicians have been tapping into prevailing biases and fear in public as a way to rally support for themselves. Anti-Islamism, fueled by half-truth and fabricated information, has become a powerful tool in this strategy. It is not rare to witness politicians employing condescending rhetoric portraying Islam and its followers in a negative light, and cashing on the fears of general public.
By framing Muslims as the ‘other,’ these leaders have tapped into the pre-existing and deep-rooted grievances to launch and prey on the sense of pseudo unity among their supporters. For instance, in India, the intersection of politics and religion has taken a multifaceted turn, where anti-Islamism narrative has been effectively exercised by Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) for electoral gains. The manipulation of religious sentiments, often through the promotion of contentious narratives, has become a recurrent theme in BJP campaigns. This trend has tarnished the so-called secular fabric of India and has not only exacerbated the plight of Indian Muslims but is spreading to other smaller religious and ethnic groups.
It is important to note here that the consequences of hate speech extend beyond electoral victories, manifesting in policies that foster discrimination, exclusion, xenophobia and a fractured social fabric. It not adversely affects the minority or marginalized group but effectively disrupts the social fabric of the host societies like India and Europe themselves. In the longer run, a hate speech can cause upheaval in the society thus propagating fragmentation and negative peace.
This situation demands a pressing need for increased awareness and education. Fostering a climate of tolerance, fact-checking, and inclusivity is essential for dismantling the elements of disruptive politics. In the battle against hate, society must stand united against attempts to scapegoat and marginalize any group based on their ethnicity or religion. Only by promoting a narrative of coexistence and addressing the root causes of social discontent, we can work towards building a more tolerant and harmonious world without the divisions of ‘us’ versus ‘them’.
About the authors: