Lula da Silva has returned to power in Brazil despite heavy intervention by US corporate interests and the Trump administration, which was pushing for Flávio Bolsonaro. The fact is that America's backyard is turning "red", and so will its interventions. After the regime change operation in Venezuela, US interference in Colombia is well known.
Lula's victory is a respite for all those who believe a multipolar world needs to be developed and envisioned. BRICS can accelerate that process, but we also know that an equally powerful corporate lobby, particularly in the United States, will work over time to create anarchy.
The social media tools and the subsequent "revolutions" we have witnessed across the globe have not paved the way for democratisation. They have brought greater control and anarchy, to be misused by the religious right. The capitalist West and the theocratic South share one common enemy: the rise of "Red", which is the biggest tool for people on the margins.
Efforts will be made to turn the voices of the margins into counter-revolutions in countries where Western capitalist interests are important. Hence the so-called Gen Z "revolution" is nothing but propaganda, defined by Western corporate studios.
Why are the protests on the streets of Paris, Brussels, Tirana and Milan not called a Gen Z revolution? Why are they framed as an immigration crisis rather than a problem of racial discrimination and lack of job opportunities for all?
This is where I disagree that the student protests in Bangladesh or Nepal were a "revolution". The crisis is deeper, and it reflects how deeply the deep state intervenes.
We are also hearing a lot of talk these days about regime change in India, and the media has been deliberately pushing it. In this age of 24x7 news, people speak without measuring their words. With so many YouTubers and digital platforms, and a microphone in everyone's hand, the crisis is serious. The first undemocratic attempt at regime change in India was actually Anna Hazare's movement in 2011, followed by the anarchy in the aftermath of the Nirbhaya protests.
Propaganda Tool
In India, the BJP and Hindutva groups were the primary beneficiaries of the social media "revolution". They used the digital world to promote their nationalist agenda, and intimidation and open threats later became their best tools for propagating it.
With a huge population of unemployed youth, YouTube and the digital world were made to look like a vast job market. From the gullies and mohallas, people are making and promoting reels. Narendra Modi himself has said on many occasions that reels are creating jobs.
I have been on social media since its birth, particularly Facebook and X, yet I have never been able to make much of it, because I never opted for their business model. My aim was to interact with friends and others keen on reasonable discussion without abuse, though my world remains very limited.
My point is that those who have gained enormously in viewership and reach are not necessarily providing the best content. These are still corporate games, and you have to fit into their system to be visible. Those who don't are confined to their own wonderworld.
The problem with this phenomenon is the need to look "different". You have to be seen in "action": people being hit by the police or vice versa, lathi charges, leaders being pushed. All of it becomes major TRP material for the channels.
If you survey YouTube experts of the last few years, their tag lines revolve around Rahul Gandhi, Narendra Modi, the RSS, the BJP, the Congress and so on. If you want to discuss anything beyond these, or without mentioning them, you will not reach the "mainstream" of the digital world.
Many of us felt that the digital world "decolonised" and, in Indian terms, "debrahmanised" the knowledge system. In fact, it only managed the smaller contradictions: those who never entered the Brahmanical mainstream found solace in creating their own digital worlds.Saner Discussion
But each channel has a single focus, and you cannot have a diversity of issues on it. You must bring the "keyword" to your talks. That is why the new system of algorithms and reach does not allow wider and saner discussion. You have to create sensation and fixate on one particular theme.
It is this sensationalism that has turned people into objects doing whatever brings more likes and, therefore, more money. I have seen youths in our villages glued to their mobiles, watching reels and creating their own. If that is "employment generation", I am afraid things will be difficult in the coming days.
I was wondering why we don't see big student protests in states such as Uttar Pradesh and Bihar. Does it mean the youth are happy, with no job or education crisis? The more I think about it, the more I feel that, to some extent, youths have become digitalised and believe there is money in it.
There was a time when student protests emerged from Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and Gujarat, but now there is a comfortable silence. Are the youth still unconnected with the issues being flashed on screens? Or have these "nationalised" versions of protest, emerging from the national capital and a few other cities, failed to connect with the needs and demands of young people elsewhere? Are these protests confined to those directly affected, while others still believe things will happen automatically?
Everyone searches for their own space during these events. Some become heroes while others complain. The media makes a brand of every individual, who then starts to feel important. Jantar Mantar can make you a "national icon".
We all know these protests were largely the work of left student unions. Anyone emerging from a Left-Ambedkarite-Periyarite circle is usually a much better speaker on current issues, social problems and international affairs than their contemporaries. Neha Bora and others emerged from AISA, so it is natural for them to speak that way.
Every activist can speak in that language, but the media has found a star and will keep prodding her, and try to control her through continuous probing about her and her family.
Chaos And Confusion
The credibility of the Bania-Brahmin media has been destroyed by its over-loyal employees. Most of them are neither journalists nor experts; they are paid for party loyalty. Prime-time shows make them "experts", and the quality of debate there is gutter-level.
They are more interested in creating chaos and confusion so that they can blame the government's opponents, and you cannot even ask them questions. They survive largely on government funds and corporate patronage, and their aim is to protect corporate interests and create confusion.
While youth icons may get excited and say anything to stay in the news, media experts wait for them to slip so they can conduct a postmortem at prime time, and everyone else becomes a cheerleader. We need to come out of this syndrome.
My respect to all those who are fighting and need support, but we must also be careful, particularly those now in the public domain. Speak when necessary, and speak with sound reasoning.
It is equally important to know who you are speaking with and what their track record is. Otherwise, each sentence can be used and misused to defame a democratic fight. Be careful.
---
*Human rights defender
Comments