News Kashmir Magazine

Online Hate

Imtiyaz R. Chashti
India today faces a paradox. Even as the nation projects confidence, ambition, and unity on the global stage, its digital spaces are increasingly consumed by anger, provocation, and manufactured hatred. Online hate, spanning religious, ethnic, caste-based, and regional lines, has moved well beyond the margins to become a systemic challenge to our public life. Platforms like Twitter (X), YouTube, Facebook, and Instagram are no longer neutral forums of debate; they have become arenas where algorithms reward outrage and division over dialogue and responsibility.
This goes far beyond the question of offensive speech. For a civilization-state like India, founded on pluralism and constitutional fraternity, unchecked online hate is a matter of national consequence. It corrodes social trust, strains cohesion, and opens fault lines that hostile forces, both internal and external, are quick to exploit.
Recent data paints a disturbing picture. In 2024 alone, hate speech incidents in India reportedly rose by over 74 percent compared to the previous year, with more than 1,100 documented events. The overwhelming majority targeted religious minorities, particularly Muslims, often accompanied by calls that went beyond criticism into dehumanization. These were not spontaneous expressions of anger; many were coordinated, amplified through rallies, influencers, and digital ecosystems designed to provoke maximum reaction.
What makes this trend truly alarming is the machinery that sustains it: hate is broadcast live, packaged into clips, amplified through shares, and monetized. Clear violations rarely result in takedowns, reinforcing the idea that outrage is profitable and responsibility optional.
The failure is not limited to tech companies. Law enforcement responses remain uneven and slow. While laws exist to penalize incitement and acts prejudicial to national integration, their application is selective. When perpetrators enjoy political patronage, social capital, or large online followings, enforcement often hesitates. Meanwhile, those who react sometimes emotionally, sometimes angrily are swiftly booked. This asymmetry breeds resentment and reinforces the belief that power, not law, determines accountability.
A nation cannot afford such moral confusion. Hate cannot be excused as nationalism. True nationalism is not about humiliating fellow citizens or reducing communities to stereotypes. It is about preserving unity, dignity, and order. History teaches us that societies collapse not only due to external aggression, but because internal cohesion is corroded from within.
The consequences of digital hate are no longer theoretical. India has already witnessed how online rumors and fear campaigns have translated into mob violence and lynchings. WhatsApp-forced hysteria and viral misinformation have cost innocent lives. Each such incident chips away at India’s social fabric and damages its democratic credibility.
The question, then, is unavoidable: how long will the Indian State allow digital spaces to be weaponised against its own people?
Reclaiming the digital republic is a matter of national interest. India needs clear, modern laws specifically addressing online hate and coordinated digital incitement. Cyber crime units must be strengthened, not merely in numbers but in capacity and autonomy. Suo motu action against viral hate content should become standard practice, not an exception dependent on public outrage.
Equally important is platform accountability. Companies that profit from Indian users must respect Indian laws and constitutional values. Transparency in moderation, swift takedowns, and cooperation with lawful investigations are not concessions—they are obligations.
Finally, citizens too have an essential role to play. A strong and confident Bharat is not built by suppressing debate, but by upholding dignity in disagreement. Freedom of expression flourishes when anchored in civic responsibility. Digital literacy, constitutional values, and ethical communication must therefore become integral to our public culture. India’s enduring strength has always been its capacity to accommodate diversity without yielding to disorder. Allowing algorithm-driven hostility to shape public discourse would be a departure from that legacy. As India advances along its development trajectory and towards its aspirations as a global power, it must act with firmness and clarity, not to silence voices, but to safeguard the Republic from forces that thrive on discord and undermine social harmony.
P.S.: Rebuttals, comments, and reasoned responses are welcome and may be shared at: imtiyazchashti@gmail.com