My previous article titled “Taking a stand against hate-speech,” sparked off many questions and gave me the opportunity to learn more about a sad reality in our lives. A mix of views and perceptions created a dark image of a deep doubt against the idea of acceptance of the other, a fundamental element of social life. As I read the comments of some of my dear readers, I asked myself many questions that these readers could ask themselves. One of these questions is: How long will humanity remain a prisoner of its history?
Many opinions and perceptions from the distant past judge reality in the light of past perceptions and interpretations. Most of these opinions are influenced by speeches of political interest.
How long will present and future generations pay the bills for hatred of the past, whether between religions, sects, ethnic groups and nationalities? How can we overcome these destructive hostilities and ideas and build a climate of tolerance and human coexistence that draws lessons from the past and promotes the need to avoid conflicts and hatred and to get rid of pretexts that have ended up damaging human and cultural relations?
How can we get rid of misconceptions of religions and stereotypes about each religion and its followers? How can we distinguish between religion as a matter of purpose and content on the one hand, and the practices of its followers on the other? How can we free ourselves from all the misleading interpretations that incite violence, carnage, hatred and racism?
Not to claim to pursue human idealism, but trying to find a path free of cultural pollution is worth all our efforts. We must, however, get out of the situation of human fragmentation driven by an extremism as old as history.
The problem is that we have given the floor to the semi-educated and the false moralists. These obsessed people, who hide behind all the problems of the present, have not read in their lives only a few biased books that misinterpret religious texts. But they will always find in dubious history books enough to defend their misguided statements.
As for the wise among us and the genuine critics who are supposed to scrutinize such books, they have divested themselves of their role. But in this situation, it is the politicians who are to blame. They made the mistake of mixing religion with whatever and using it in narrow partisan and sectarian conflicts, without taking into account the consequences.
For example, hatemongers find in the Islamic religion only simple myths that promote killing and terror. They simply ignore the tolerant precepts of Islam that go further than any modern human rights charter. And extremists see in Christianity only the injustices committed by its followers against Muslims. They all overlook the historical and chronological contexts of religious texts. They stick labels and designations to each other that fuel the fire of sedition, feed religious radicalism and foment hate.
But what is far more dangerous is to judge religions by the practices or interpretations of some of their followers. How is it reasonable that the teachings given by the one God, the Creator of all human beings, contradict each other? How would He incite his creatures against each other? Why do we prefer to read the interpretations rather than the original text?
When we talk about hatred, we are referring to the broader concept of discord between adherents and false followers of religions.
Coexistence and tolerance can only be attained by rejecting any form of hatred, whether religious hatred or any content that disseminates, justifies, or incites ethnic hatred, xenophobia or other forms of hatred based on non-acceptance of others, be it a minority or immigrants and their descendants.
A heart-warming campaign was led by a European organization called #ChooseRespect, which addresses the myths that circulate about immigrants and refugees. It aims to win what it describes as a moral battle.
One of the most dangerous tools to spread hatred is to manipulate minds by falsifying facts and history. It is a huge industry that invests billions of dollars, not only to target countries and peoples, but also to trigger wars and conflicts on behalf of pressure groups and transnational corporations. These practices are not limited to a particular geographical area or community.
A European official report on the European Parliament elections last May revealed that hundreds of accounts on Facebook and Twitter and more than 100 channels on YouTube conveyed hate speech and disseminated misleading information and radical messages. According to the report, populist parties played a key role in this affair.
That is how dangerous it is to use hate propaganda content to achieve political, religious or personal objectives. Combating hate speech and incitement in all its forms is defending the future of humanity as a whole. It is a moral battle par excellence.
