Donald Trump's bark is not worse than Allah-hu-Akbar bite
The rise of Donald Trump in America has been one of the most fascinating studies in modern times. When he first declared that he was running for President, the news was met with derision and mirth. The fact that he has now emerged as a serious challenger has flummoxed people and left many reeling. How is it possible, people wonder, for anyone to root for a man who says the most inappropriate, cringe worthy things, in such a brash and brazen way? What is his appeal in an age where it is almost mandatory to use "correct" language, and say the "right" things?
Senior journalist Swapan Dasgupta recently wrote an incisive piece where he said that Trump's rise is essentially a reaction against "stifling political correctness". As he and many others analysts have pointed out, Trump manages to articulate, on a larger stage, what many people are feeling.
This sentiment is clearly not confined to the United States, as far-right parties and protestors are rising rapidly across Europe, even in the liberal societies of Scandinavia. In my view, a large part of this is a consequence of taking political correctness too far.
Political correctness started off as an attempt to avoid offence, especially to marginalised groups. However, it has increasingly degenerated into a habit of mouthing false inanities, borne out of hypocrisy and fear. Over time this behaviour has begun to rankle, resulting in a backlash. Trump is an obvious, in-your-face example of such a backlash. But there are more subtle, and in my opinion, far more damaging responses. Let me illustrate a few.
There are a series of videos that are now viral on the Internet, titled the "Allah-hu-Akbar Compilation". They show innocuous, everyday things, such as a person washing his car, a family going grocery shopping, or even clips from popular cartoons. Then suddenly, one character in the video goes insane, throws an object, screams "Allah-hu-Akbar", and everything explodes. There is Arabic music and script in the backdrop.
When I first saw the videos, I was stunned that something so offensive was a rage, especially among children across the world. Many of them study in liberal institutions that lay great emphasis on humanitarian sentiments and global values. Yet they clearly identified with videos that were against all of these principles. Surely, something was amiss?
A less outrageous version of the same theme is played out in the popular prank videos, which many of you may have seen. Typically, a bearded, or "different" looking person leaves a backpack near unsuspecting people, who flee in terror thinking it is a bomb. I won't go into the layers of negative messaging that is inherent in these videos, since they are obvious. Instead, I will highlight some of the possible causes.
Today terror strikes across the world are an unfortunate reality. Many of the people who carry out these attacks claim to act in the name of their God. When they kill, torture and rape people, they quote scriptures to justify their unspeakable acts. Their hate and cruelty defies logic and makes the world a very unpredictable and scary place.
When faced with such horror, people need answers and assurance. Instead of having an honest conversation to address the fear and anger, politicians, media and the predominantly left-liberal opinion makers often resort to a series of predictable, politically correct responses. They either dilute the news, or immediately add the rider that "it has nothing to do with religion", or justify the act by listing perceived historic injustices and marginalisation, or shift blame by pointing at atrocities committed by others groups.
These responses are clearly not helpful. It is obvious from the above examples that what is being said is at odds with what many people perceive. As political correctness does not allow open conversation, it is being driven underground in the form of mocking videos. In politics, it is resulting in the rise of far-right groups. The consequence is increased polarisation and suspicion of the "other".
In this highly charged environment, there is an urgent need to have open and candid conversations, especially with our next generation. We have to explain that there is growing radicalisation, and a section of people have usurped the right to speak on behalf of the majority. They use violence to tyrannise and silence all opposition. Their actions are as scary and repulsive to the believers, as they are to the non-believers.
In order for that conversation to take place effectively, the first thing that needs to change is the automatic defensive responses. When defensiveness replaces difficult dialogue, the majority takes on the sins of the violent minority, and ends up sharing the blame unfairly.
Second, the moderates on both sides need to seize the narrative and bring some level of sanity. Currently, the suffocating, politically correct discourse is primarily driven by the left-liberals. The counter-strike is increasingly being led by the far right. In this clash of extreme ideologies, Trump is not the worst thing that can happen. Remember, there was once a man named Hitler.
Note: While I have used the response to Islamist terror to illustrate my point, the problem of political correctness cuts across many other issues.