The term “post-truth” typically refers to a type of public discourse that eschews factual accuracy in favour of emotional resonance. Under such circumstances, lies are propagated under the guise of truth. The concept of a post-truth world has become a relevant part of academia with the current controversial election process where Prime Minister Modi is running for an unprecedented third term. In the midst of these developments, populism has taken on a new form known as “post-truth politics,” which has turned Indian citizens into a “bewildered herd.” Holding on to BJP agenda, Prime Minister Modi made controversial remarks during a rally in Rajasthan. He had called Muslims “infiltrators” and said that if the opposition Congress party were elected, it would give the country’s riches to them. Modi’s rhetorical speech is perceived as an attempt to win over his Hindu voter base and to polarize the population on religious grounds further, as he implies that Muslims are to blame for the growing population and have been given preference for the nation’s wealth in the past. With Muslims being a sizable percentage of India’s population, Modi’s BJP narrative has increased apprehension among its supporters over the demographic balance.
In the context of elections, the frequently intellectual discussion of truth in politics takes a more pragmatic turn. Politicians use distorted truth as a trick to win over voters. All kinds of Media platforms play pertinent roles in this evil-doing. Though they may not always be apparent lies, the media’s presentation of reality may significantly impact public opinion because it is carefully crafted to sway public opinion. Indian media funded by the BJP agenda is using a “CNN Effect,” leading the targeted Hindu voters not towards truth but into a realm beyond. Modi and his party politics involve making assertions without substantial evidence to support their validity. Post-truth political narratives, which are based more on skewed religious sentiments and beliefs than on objective facts, are being heavily promoted by the Indian media. Indian media and BJP representatives covered up Modi’s “anti-Muslim” hate speech with a lie. By bringing up the global issue of immigrants into the limelight, they lied, saying that by infiltrators, they meant illegal immigrants in the country.
On the other hand, the Congress party declared that Modi’s remarks during his address were objectionable and displeasing and asked the Indian Election Commission to launch an inquiry. However, even days after Modi made the divisive statements, the Election Commission has not responded. This inactivity also damages the reputation of the elections. There is a recurring theme in Prime Minister Modi’s remarks from the beginning of this election campaign: portraying the opposition parties as hostile to Hindu interests. His analogies include saying that the Congress party’s platform reflects the impact of the Muslim League, the historical organization that was prominent in promoting Muslim rights during British rule. Traditional political tactics to overcome dissent typically require finding a scapegoat; Muslims have been singled out for this role in the case of the BJP. Long-standing disputes between the Hindu and Muslim populations have been linked to Hindutva ideology and “saffron terrorism.” Critics have accused Modi of undermining India’s secular foundations throughout his ten-year tenure. The special status granted to Jammu and Kashmir, a predominately Muslim territory, was removed by the abolition of Articles 370 and 35A under his regime. This act instituted a citizenship amendment that grants citizenship to non-Muslims and Hindus in Jammu and Kashmir. Thus, India is changing the demographic structure of the IOJK, just like what Israel did with Palestine. Not to forget, the critical “Lord Ram temple” in northeastern Ajodhya, which was opened in January under Modi’s direction, is located in a historically divisive location of Hindu-Muslim strife.
Analyzing the 2024 Indian election campaign, it exhibits a significant decline in the values of democracy and truthfulness. Consequently, the growing influence of Hindutva ideology poses a threat to the objectiveness of liberal voting. Justice and respect for human rights must be ingrained in society for a democratic government to function effectively. The Modi government has used “big lie” misinformation and “big stick” coercion as strategies to win the elections. Phrases like “nationalist” and “anti-nationalist” became widely used after the Jawaharlal Nehru University slogan incident. Since then, digital media has consistently used these terms in prime-time discussions and programs. People who voice opinions that differ from those of the followers of the ruling party, including activists and opposition members, are sometimes labeled as “anti-Indian” and “traitors.”
Since Modi made hate speech against Muslims, there has been a growing “aggressive journalism” in India, which is reflected in the language used by news anchors and discussion on television, coupled with verbal abuse and threats. This combative approach has also permeated social media, feeding into continuous online disputes between government supporters and detractors. Muslims, who constitute the most significant minority in India, are frightened to go out in public because of prevailing Islamophobia in society. What will India’s future be if Modi wins for the third time? If Modi’s “divine India” is the future, then I must conclude that it is very different from the secular principles of Nehru, which founded India. It is not wrong to say that dark times are ahead for minorities in India, as they are already labeled as second-class citizens in India.
Zaman Bajwa
The Writer is Executive Director of Islamabad Think Tank YFK and a freelance contributor. He tweets @zamanbajwaa.
