Hate speeches are any form of communication that attacks, threatens and degrades individuals or groups on the basis of some identity such as religion, race, gender, disability, nationality and even sexual orientation, among others.
It crosses the boundaries of differences of opinions and disagreements as it targets actual members of a particular group with an attempt to marginalise them, incite fear among them and even instigate violence against them.
Hate speech has its own history, and its language has always been used by dominant and powerful groups to justify the idea of segregation, exclusion and even persecution against members who do not fit in the mould of one’s subjective ideas of righteousness.
In the era of social and digital media, the spread of such hateful speech makes it even harder to control and regulate, thereby causing widespread conflicts.
To understand why anyone would use hate speech as a tool to spread unrest, uncertainty or threat, one has to delve into the Social Identity Theory. Developed by Henri Tajfel and John Turner in the 1970s, the theory explains that our self-concept is based not just on what others and we think about ourselves but also on our group memberships, based on nationality, gender, caste and yes, even political parties and religion.
This shapes up two groups, the in-group and the out-group. The in-group is the group to which one has membership, and the out-group obviously implies that there is no belonging. Research indicates that often polarised societies are set up based on these differences.
Inequalities among communities and people can be injected by demonising the out-group whilst enhancing one’s own self-image. Tajfel’s simple social experiments showed that even arbitrary divisions of assigning people to different teams based on a coin toss can bring on in-group favouritism and out-group derogation, thus deepening social divisions.
But why do people have the urge to divide communities in this manner, sometimes even on unsupported grounds? Psychologist Paul Ekman gives the concept of ‘duper’s delight’, where one derives pleasure in subtle manipulation and ego boosts from tall assertions given in spotlight positions.
Fear-based leadership exploits loyalty on large public platforms, and somewhere there is a latent thrill of power playing out. Derogatory speeches are alleviated insults, which can have big effects with little effort, as put forth by Yiannis Gabriel, a sociologist who said that such insults can trigger intense emotional reactions from audiences.
Goans are mindful of such storms brewing in their backyard, as it has been in some parts of the country. Those with the agenda of divisive politics bank on this, outrage begets counter-outrage, polarising people further, which might be the motive in the first place.
While it is necessary to ask for action in a just manner, what is important is to be mindful in showing the rest of the country and world that division is not a value that Goans uphold, and never will!
( The writer is Associate Professor and Head of Department of Psychology at St Xavier’s College, Mapusa)
