- Mock Questions for Mains
- Q. Long Wolf Attack (GSM3)
- Q. Hate speech & social media
Mock Questions for Mains
Answer following questions in 200 words each, in blank A4 sized papers with 1″ margins on each side:
- (GSM3) What do you understand by the term “lone wolf attack”? Why are such attacks happening in USA and EU but not in India? (OR) Discuss India’s preparedness against “Lone wolf attacks” (अकेले दहशतगर्द)
- (GSM3) Examine the causes behind the increased frequency of hate speech in India, and its impact on internal security. (नफरत फेलानेवाले / भडकाऊ भाषण)
- (GSM4) Suggest measures to tackle the growing menace of hate speech on social media.
Q. Long Wolf Attack (GSM3)
Introduction of the Answer:
- Definition: Lone wolf is a radicalized individual, who carries out terror attack without enlisting in any particular terrorist outfit or receiving any formal training or funding from them. He is usually influenced and radicalized via internet, and is self-taught in the methods of mass murder. (else we’d have called it sleeper cell agent or fidayeen attacker.)
- Origin: Term “lone wolf” was popularized in the late 1990s by white supremacists to encourage fellow racists to act alone in committing violent crimes against racial and religious minorities. But the term has gained more presence in media because of the repeated call by the ISIS terrorists to individuals, particularly in US, EU and other large democracies to carry out attacks against non-believers (काफिर). (but why bother memorizing such years and facts. simply describe it in your own words like i’ve done in the definition!)
- Data: Between 2015 to 2017, there have been __ number of lone wolf attacks in EU and USA. Lone wolves are individual who … ( then you’ll have to insert definition only! then why not start with definition itself! )
Why Lone wolf is dangerous?
- Unlike the commanders and cadres of conventional terrorist organizations such as JeM or LeT, these lone wolves are not in the radar of intelligence agencies. Hence they’re difficult to identify and capture, until their spontaneous attack.
- Difficult to differentiate between extremists who intend to commit attacks and those who simply express radical beliefs or issue hollow threats. In India, freedom of speech and now the “right to privacy” are fundamental rights. This limits possibilities of physical, email and phone surveillance of non-violent radical scenes and ‘hollow threats’.
- Unlike the conventional terrorists who attack high value targets and sensitive public places, the Lone wolves tend to strike at places associated with their personal frustration, like a school, college, mall
or public service commission. So, difficult to anticipate the location and augment security in advance.
- Lone wolves also have little or no constraints on their level of violence. Because they are not part of a group, lone wolves are not concerned with alienating possible supporters (unlike terrorists or naxalites who would try to avoid collateral damage to Kashmiris or tribals respectively during their planned ambush.)
- Past incidents have proved, our local police is inadequate even to handle conventional attack, let alone Lone wolf attack. and in a fast growing population and structural issues in the job market, there is no dearth of unemployed / underpaid youth waiting to be influenced by domestic and foreign terror groups.
Why Lone Wolf not successfully in India?
- Some of the “Scholars” even include ‘throwing pie at politician’ as a lone wolf attack but on that logic, Lone wolves have been quite successful in India at throwing ink and shoes on politicians.
- We are asked to write about India’s “preparedness”- so we also have to highlight that lone wolves have remained #EPICFAIL so far.
- ISIS recruitment and radicalization strategy revolves around social media. So far, most of the Indian youth who joined ISIS were from South / Western India where internet penetration is high.
- But, in 2015, Intelligence bureau started “Operation Chakravyuh” to monitor the internet for the activities of the youth who are in touch with Islamic State operatives or viewing the material posted. If they find a person is moving beyond a threshold, they trap and arrest him.
- Thus, while ISIS managed to radicalize some youths such as Areeb Majeed and Mehdi Masroor Biswas but their plans were foiled before any lone wolf attack could happen in India.
- In USA, easy to purchase automatic rifles because their Constitution itself provides for ‘right to bear arms.’ In EU, possible to purchase small arms and ammunition from organized criminal gangs. In India, this is difficult. At maximum, such radicalized youth could buy Country made (DESHI) weapon but that will prove ineffective in mass slaughter.
- The private security at shopping malls and public places discourage knife attacks.
- There are no previous successful examples, for radicalized youth to emulate and get inspired from.
- Indians usually don’t have psychological willingness to undertake “fidayeen” type suicide attacks.
- (Type 1) While India has so far remained safe from Lone wolf attacks because of aforementioned reasons, all of its parents, citizens and security agencies must always remain vigilant over the activities of frustrated youth, to prevent such attacks. OR
- (Type 2) With their attacks in EU and USA, the Lone wolves have proven repeatedly that they can be as dangerous and have as much impact as the larger, better-financed, and better-trained terrorist organizations. Hence both the Indian state and its society must not show any laxity in preventing and thwarting their growth in India.
Q. Hate speech & social media
- Definition: Hate speech is a speech that promotes feeling of enmity, hatred or ill-will between different religious, racial, caste, linguistic, regional, gender or sexual groups. It is a speech that incites people to do acts prejudicial to maintenance of communal harmony and public order. (OR you can begin introduction with the ‘origin’)
- Origin: From Jinnah asking Muslims to initiate ‘direct action’ against Hindus, to Hindu Mahasabha speakers inciting hatred against other communities, hate speech has been a feature in the public life of India, even before we gained independence. However, the occurrences of hate speech have became more frequent and regular in the present day India because:
Why Hate speech is increasing?
- Internet and social media allows offensive speeches to affect a larger audience in a short span of time. Rural people (with free jio4g) accept hate speech and fake news without cross-verification of the facts presented therein, and then they indulge in violence. Add more points from why FAKE news is dangerous, from my earlier answer here.
- Gradual degradation in political culture and ethics– where winning at any cost is justified. Rarely any political leader has been given exemplary punishment by EC or SC. This has furthered bolstered the confidence of radical and ‘intolerant’ elements within politics.
- Changing demography of India viz a viz the structural issues in India’s regulatory and legal structure- have hampered the creation of well paying formal jobs in the organized sector. This results into either unemployment or underpaid jobs– ultimately leading to anger and disaffection among Indian youth. The evil elements use hate speech to channelize that anger towards the other caste, religion, region or linguistic groups- as if they are responsible for all the problems.
- In India, most of the hate speeches are confined to caste, religion and migration. But, In developed nations, the hate speech has more varieties:
- Negationism i.e. denying that holocaust happened. This type of hateful thinking find buyers among dissatisfied people who feel Jews have cornered all the economic opportunities in their country.
- Homophobia and inciting action against sexual minorities- particularly by radical Christian organizations.
GSM2: Preventing Hate Speech by legal measures
While our Constitution provides for freedom of speech and expression but acknowledges that liberty cannot be absolute or uncontrolled, therefore, legislature is empowered to impose reasonable restrictions in the interests of public order, morality and relations with foreign nations. Accordingly, following laws are present against “hate speech”
- Indian Penal Code (IPC) has sections against provoking sedition, religious hatred and public disorder. (no need to memorize sections. (We are not writing answer for law optional!)
- Representation of the People Act, 1951 (RPA) disqualifies person from contesting election if he/she tries to incite enmity on grounds of religion, race, caste, community or language.
- Religious Institutions Act’88, Cable TV network act’95 and Cinematograph acts’52 have provisions to prohibit transmission of sermons / programs / movies which can incite hatred among people towards each other.
- Information Technology Act. However, in Shreya Singhal case, the supreme court declared its section 66-A as invalid (2015) since it was often misused by police to arrest innocent individuals when they posted contents against politicians. Afterwards, Home ministry had setup TK Viswanathan Committee to review mechanisms against hate speech. This Committee has recommended updating various sections of IPC to deal with the menace of hate speech.
- I’m not going in the details, because mostly it’s about updating individual sections of IPC. It could be relevant to law optional subject but not much to GS. Besides, Government is yet to implement.
- I’m not discussing the impact of hate speech on internal security because it’s quite easy. consider it homework (Hint: Hate speech helps terrorist, secessionists, and lone wolfs.)
- In GSM2 or GSM3, “social media & hate speech” topic will require answers mostly from legal point of view. But if asked in the GSM4 paper, you’ve to associate it with the role of family and society, ethics and self-regulation. Here are the fodder points:
GSM4/ Ethics: Preventing hate speech by improving character of people(!)
While police and courts can take action against a hate speech only after it has been made, but we can minimize the damage potential of hate speech, with following measures:
- Popular television dramas should subtly and effectively promote harmony between warring communities. Eg. Tarak Mehta kaa Ulta Chashma where Abdul is shown participating in the event management for all Hindu festivals and the hindu society members arranging Eid and Iftaar for him. Similarly, Roshan Singh Sodhi (a Punjabi) always fight against any “goonda elements” threatening any Gujarati, Tamilian or Maharashtrian family in his society.
- Movies can also help by NOT stereotyping the characters and portraying them in poor light, poor humor or making mockery of their lifestyle e.g. Tribal community and LGBT.
- Religious heads and popular figures can build empathy across religious lines to reduce communal tension by leading personal examples– such as the friendship between Pramukh Swami Maharaj and Dr. APJ Kalam.
- In social media, hate speech can’t spread if people don’t ‘like’, ‘retweet’, ‘share’ or ‘forward’ such content. These ‘forwarders‘ are the weakest links. If religious, political, film and sports celebrities persuade people from forwarding such content, it’ll reduce the damage potential of hate-speech to a great extent.
- Hate preachers tend to manipulate historical facts and events to prove their points. Therefore, parents, teachers and textbooks play an important role in shaping young children’s opinion towards other communities beforehand. But care should be taken to ensure that ‘sanitized version’ of history doesn’t deprive younger generation from learning the truth about violent and oppressive regimes and leaders, and the importance of empathy and compassion.
(Otherwise, new NCERT portrays that all medieval kings were secular and none of them killed, raped, assassinated or looted anybody. But, Khal Drogo was not the only barbarian ruler in the whole Westeros.)
- Media also needs to be vigilant that police action is a non-selective, non-arbitrary and transparent manner against any hate preacher irrespective of his political or religious clout or the TRP potential of the community.
- After a political leader makes hate speech, his fellow party leaders either feign ignorance or ‘disassociate‘ themselves personally from the speech. But, political parties need to update their constitution and internal-procedures to condemn such speeches in strictest manner and remove the membership of such leaders and their supporters.
- You can add more points in the comment section, although these many points sufficient to fill 200 words.
- (Type 1) The objective of free speech in a democracy is to promote plurality of opinions. But hate speech hurts the fabric of unity within a society, therefore, it must be stopped in any form (oral or written) and in any medium (live, paper, electronic). OR
- (Type 2, if asked about social media) Internet is an important tool for disseminating information and opinions, it also serves as a platform for disseminating unlawful speech. While adequate measures already exist in our legal framework but need of the hour is to improve the character of individuals so they don’t indulge in making, spreading or believing in such hate speeches.