shiv wrote:
I am certain that the trigger event starts with a preacher on TV or on the pulpit. Assuming he is sunni, it is likely that he makes some accusations against shias or a particular shia. I am guessing that such accusations would revolve around what Agnimitra has mentioned in his post. It is likely that he provokes anger and indignation among his congregation. Maybe this occurs several times - over the span of some weeks or months.
Technically, none of this can occur without the preacher of hate. but the preacher of hate is virtually powerless without the system that operates by using his hate speeches as commands to fund, train terrorists and implement violence.
Why and when does a preacher of any ideology preach 'hate'?
This, goes to a deeper question: why and when does an ideology preach 'hate'?
What is the job of a preacher?
A preacher's job is to preach something...anything, as long as people listen to him. If the people don't listen to him, then the preacher would find it difficult to sustain himself. So, preacher has to capture the attention of his audience.
A job that requires someone to say something regularly and hold people's attention is not easy. Generally, people will get bored of listening to any topic after sometime.
Generally, there seem to be two ways of holding people's attention without inviting boredom:
a) can be held by engaging them in topics of intellectual/creative pursuits. Debates, logic, music, dance,...etc. or
b) by raising the spectre of 'us vs them' or 'I vs you'.
Intellectual pursuits would mean anything that engages the intellect in a constructive manner. Generally, the questions about the world around are taken up and one grapples to find answers to them. This slowly goes towards existential questions like:
'Who created the world?'
'Why was world created?'
'How was world created?'
These sort of questions lead to the development of philosophy/science. This engages the people intellectually and a preacher can talk about these topics to his audience quite regularly because there is a lot of scope/depth in these subjects that can be explored.
Creative pursuits would mean arts like music, dance, acting, poetry, writing, acting, even fighting(or martial arts), games...etc. These activities also have lot of scope for exploration that a preacher can use to preach to his audience without boring them.
Both creative and intellectual pursuits have a common thing: In these activities, a person is competing with self. It is a sort of self-improvement mechanism. In a way, the activity becomes just a tool or method to improve oneself.
One finds that Bhaarathiya religions have a huge amount of philosophy and arts department. This allows the practitioners and preachers to engage themselves in lots of activity that involves philosophy or arts without boring themselves. Getting bored seems to be the biggest worry in the world. Mind craves some activity...any activity. An empty mind is a devil's workshop. If the mind is not constructively engaged, it will turn to destructive activities/thoughts. The same applies to ideologies.
Ideologies that lack philosophy and arts component provide a challenge to the preacher to come up with something engaging to his audience. This is a very difficult job. Almost any topic becomes stale after it is repeated sometimes. But a preacher has to live all his life preaching something or the other! If there are no preachers, then the ideology will die.
So, what can the preacher do?
Well, preacher turns to the only other topic that never fails to engage people: 'us vs them'.
There are several variations of 'us vs them' theme that preachers of different ideologies can indulge in. Eg: men vs women, boys vs men, infants vs old men, animals vs humans, liberal vs conservative, traditional vs modern, faithful vs unfaithful, ...etc.
Regardless of that particular variation, the larger them is always 'us vs them'. Obviously, in such a theme, the 'other' is dissed and cussed. This is why 'hate' gets propagated. Basically, this means that even if the present 'enemy' or 'other' is removed, the preacher/ideology will find some other 'enemy' or 'other' to stay relevant. The preacher or ideology needs the 'other' because they depend on 'us vs them' theme to stay relevant to their audience.
That means any ideology that wants to avoid ending up in such negative 'us vs them' theme should develop intellectual/philosophical or artistic/creative components within their ideology.
But, there is a negative in this aspect for the preacher or the ideology:
If the people start seriously practicing intellectual/philosophical or artistic/creative components, then they are less likely to listen the regular preaches of the preacher. As I said, people are likely to look at their own intellectual/artistic pursuits as a self-improvement mechanism. So, they will give greater importance to it and the importance of the preacher(or even the ideology) gets reduced. Why would a preacher/ideology want to encourage a component that is likely to reduce his/her own power?
Another danger for the preacher or ideology from intellectual/artistic pursuits is that those pursuits can be decoupled from the ideology and pursued independently by the people. If people start following intellectual/artistic pursuits after decoupling it from the ideology, the ideology becomes completely sidelined and faced extinction.
But, generally, the reason these intellectual/artistic components are not developed by all ideologies is because it is not easy to develop them. It requires a certain amount of talent, dedication, skill, technology, money, free-time, ...etc. And its not possible for a single person to do that suddenly. Its built over time gradually or passed down from previous generations. For both such activities to occur, there needs to be a relative peace or stability. If there is a lot of instability in the society, then it is unlikely for such components to develop.
People who practice intellectual/artistic pursuits would need patrons. That means some people would need to be ready to give money to these people. That means there needs to be respect for intellectuals or artists. Only in an environment where the intellectuals/artists are respected, can the intellectual/artistic pursuits possible.
Once an ideology starts on the theme of 'us vs them', the general trajectory will be
1) asking for the 'them' not to hurt 'us'. Victim - seige.
2) asking for 'us' to be equal to 'them'.
3) asking for 'us' to subjugate 'them'.
4) asking for 'us' to eliminate 'them'.
One may ask: why the progression? Any thought or activity is like a drug. It requires more frequency and intensity every successive time to get the same high that was provided the last time. That first time a preacher talks about 'us vs them' in a victim mode, he may get lots appreciation from the people. But, after sometime, it becomes stale. Then, he has to raise the stakes. In a way, preacher himself may get bored if he keeps repeating the same thing. The audience will anyway get bored. So, the progression. After one progression, then the preacher has to find some other 'them' and again repeat the cycle.
This is the general pattern of the thinking. Some other factors that play a role are:
a) power equations between 'us and 'them'.
b) if 'we' need 'them' for some purpose.
c) general empathy.
a) power equations between 'us' and them':
Depending on who is powerful and how much powerful, the ideology/preacher preaches 'us vs them'. If 'they' are more powerful then 'us', then the preacher would ask for equal equal. If even that is not possible, the the preacher would ask for 'don't hurt us'. If 'we' are more powerful then 'them', then the preacher would ask for subjugation or elimination.
b) if 'we' need 'them', then the preacher will ask for subjugation but will avoid asking for elimination. Preacher may also ask for eliminating the need, so that the 'they' can be eliminated.
c) general empathy.
All creatures(particularly human beings) have a general empathy towards all creatures. When any creature is in pain/suffering, others also find it painful. This general empathy is caused because people inherently know that all creatures are more or less similar. The thinking is,"just as I feel pain/fear, the others will also feel pain/fear." This thinking leads to sympathizing or empathizing with the other. When one feels that the other is also similar to oneself, then one is unlikely to 'hate' the other because no one hates oneself. This thinking acts against 'us vs them' theme. Since it acts against the 'us vs theme' and if 'us vs them' is the only stock in the trade for a particular preacher/ideology, then that particular preacher/ideology will not take kindly to this general empathy. That particular preacher/ideology will try to kill general empathy in their audience, so that 'us vs them' is no opposed on that count.