Nationalism, schmationalism. It’s Stockholm syndrome

Sickular Libtard

A large part of our mainstream media directs its righteous dragon breath on that gravest of threats to the integrity of India: Indian citizens. It assiduously discredits and vilifies students and scholars, writers and artists, dissenters, sane journalists, and political opponents. And it spins fact and fake news in favour of the government, on which it has a serious crush. If you’ve ever watched Arnab Goswami in his Kali-in-a-bad-mood avatar, festooned with garlands of fearsome hashtags and verbally drinking blood, you know what I mean.

Journalism, you may dimly remember, has one function: to hold power to account in the public interest. You couldn’t possibly deduce this from consuming news today, but the idea is to focus on critically evaluating the powerful, not the weak; the government, not the opposition. The idea is to stand up for justice, not expediency; and individual rights, not political majoritarianism. The idea is to give voice to the voiceless, not amplify the State.

Yet here we are in 2019 and, with honourable exceptions, the fourth estate is to be found perpetually rolled over, panting to have its tummy tickled by the government, maybe get a treat.

So, what could possibly make journalists shred their self-respect, beat it to pulp, flambé it with the blow-torch of zeal, and crucify the whole hot mess on prime time every day, with no fear of the contempt of millions of viewers and readers, and of posterity?

I think it may be a version of Stockholm syndrome.

Stockholm syndrome is that thing when, bound and gagged in some filthy basement, hung from chains, waterboarded and sleep-deprived, raped and starved and imprisoned, the captive nevertheless begins to identify with the oppressor to the point of loyalty and protectiveness. It’s barking mad, but it happens.

I say “a version” because, normally, hostages are taken hostage against their will. In this case, while the government does actually bind and gag some media—by withdrawing advertising, or suing, or setting the taxman loose on owners or employees—others enthusiastically run into said basement—let’s call it abasement—and tie and gag themselves there without provocation, making cow eyes at their chosen masters and eagerly awaiting approval.

Stockholm syndrome-afflicted media have, essentially, erased the line between national interest and public interest. The government is supposed to uphold national interest; the media is supposed to critically evaluate the government’s direction and actions regarding national interest, from the point of view of the public and the Constitution.

But too many journalists now think from the point of the view of the State. And before long, citizens consuming the news do, too. Instead of defending the public’s life, liberty, and constitutional rights, everyone ends up hotly defending the government’s right to curtail all of these in an unexamined black box labelled ‘national interest’.

Maybe that’s why, as a nation, we’re cheering and blushing with delight as we give away our rights, our privacy, our autonomy, and our powers of independent thought to surveillance systems, to the Home Ministry, and to the staggering propaganda machinery of power.

It’s just as well that no police or counsellors are on their way to rescue us—we’d probably just beg to be left there, trussed up like chickens, to worship our masters in peace.