The abettors of rage

Over the past few years, the global public has articulated an increasing concern about the influence that social media platforms might exert on a society when co-opted by vested political interests. More specifically, there is an increased worry that there exists a deep-seated accommodation between social media and fascist governments, a point that mirrors the historically cozy relationship between big corporations and fascist governments in the early 20th century.

In India, the country with the largest fake news problem in the world (according to a 2018 Microsoft study), the problem of political manipulation to incite violence has been particularly acute, and so has the coziness of social media giants with the current fascist ruling party (BJP). As recent Wall Street Journal (WSJ) investigations have revealed, Facebook has deliberately turned a blind eye to a litany of posts by members of the BJP that constitute a violation of Facebook’s own standards for incitement to violence. At the crux of this controversy lies the character of Ankhi Das, a top Facebook executive who has served as the company’s top lobbyist in Delhi, and nominally its public policy director for India, South & Central Asia. The WSJ has reported Das as saying that punishing violations by BJP workers “would damage the company’s business prospects in the country,” showing a preference for business over ethics or public safety.

The posts in question include those by BJP political members whose statements have urged the purge of Muslims in India, with potential for roiling majoritarian BJP adherents to act on hatred towards the minority community. In recent years, the Indian government has increasingly gained electoral clout by attacking the Muslims of India, a point that is not lost upon many observers of Facebook and other social media’s lax standards towards dangerous content, as shown in testimonies before the US Congress.

While serving as Facebook’s main lobbyist in India, Das has driven Facebook to let slip many posts that would incite violence, but Das’s links to far-right organisations run deeper, as Das’s twin sister is still a committed Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP) activist. Das had also held a similar lobbying position at Microsoft earlier in her career. However, Facebook’s response has been its usual trope: “we prohibit hate speech and content that incites violence and we enforce these policies globally without regard to anyone’s political position or party affiliation.” 

But scholars dating back to the 20th century interwar period have carefully pointed out the frighteningly close relationships that develop between business and fascist politicians with relative ease. Daniel Guerin’s seminal 1936 work Fascism and Big Business highlighted how big business and fascist governments in Germany and Italy would easily come into accommodation, and big business would happily sacrifice moral considerations for a larger slice of the corporate pie.

While 20th century businesses might have included the banking, pharmaceutical, construction, and transport sectors (among others), the much newer industry of social media seems equally keen to jump on the fascist bandwagon while sacrificing ethical duties to protect minorities from violence. The economic pie is not small either; India became Facebook’s largest user market in 2017 when it crossed the 240 million-user mark. Today, the number exceeds 300 million, accounting for more than 10% of Facebook’s entire global user base. Yet social media is as much a political and social phenomenon as an economic one, but the choices that the titans of Silicon Valley are making today might literally put people’s lives in danger thousands of miles away. 

By hiring fascist sympathisers in foreign markets, Facebook is reflecting a longstanding ethos of big business that prioritises greater sales over people’s lives. Facebook thus becomes an abettor of rage, and a larger instrument in the hybrid warfare strategies of countries such as India which yearn to persecute their minorities. Of all the critiques of Facebook, and they are by no means trifling, abetting the violence of hard-line fascists must count among the most egregious. 

Dr. Usman W. Chohan is Director for Economics and National Affairs at the Centre for Aerospace and Security Studies (CASS). This article was first published in The Nation newspaper. He can be reached at [email protected]

Image Source: Digital Vidya 


Share this article

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Recent Publications

Browse through the list of recent publications.

Space-Enabled Warfare in the 21st Century: Pathways for Developing States

Space has emerged as a distinct domain of warfare alongside land, sea, air, and cyber. Developed countries like the United States, Russia, and China possess offensive and support capabilities in space. In the shadowed expanse of Low Earth Orbit (LEO), where satellites operate like silent custodians, the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine transformed the nature of modern conflict. As Russian troops marched forward, the commercial satellites like Maxar and Planet, which are operated by Western firms, captured high-resolution imagery of Russian troops, providing real-time intelligence to Ukrainian commanders, unlike ever before.

Read More »

The US-Israel War on Iran: Objectives, Strategy, and Escalation Management

Zahra Niazi
‘States tend to overestimate themselves or the benefits and swiftness of war, and to underestimate their opponents’ capabilities, intentions, or the costs and duration of war.’ If anything, the 2026 war initiated by the United States and Israel against Iran shall be remembered in the annals of warfare among the most visible manifestations of this dynamic.
The war, immediately preceded by the January mass protests in Iran, did not represent a sudden rupture but rather the continuation of a 47-year-long confrontation and a more intense phase of the June 2025 war.
The US Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth, defined the war’s objectives as being laser-focused: to destroy Iran’s missile capabilities and its security infrastructure, while ensuring that it could never develop nuclear weapons. Beyond these stated objectives, among the priorities on the continuum also lay the objective of regime change, with both President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu explicitly calling on the Iranian population to take over the government at the outset of the war.

Read More »

Marka-e-Haq to the Peace Talks: Pakistan’s Middle Power Status

On 7th May 2025, Pakistan’s military forces took the international security community by surprise when it demonstrated operational superiority against its larger belligerent adversary India with its rapid and coordinated response. The Four-Day conflict proved to be a watershed moment for Pakistan, marking its rapid emergence as an important player in the region. In recent years, amidst the ongoing global competition between the United States and China, Islamabad has adopted a position of ’Strategic Balancing,’ where it maintains ties of cooperation with both Beijing and Washington. Deft diplomacy, emphasis on geo-economics, and credible conventional and strategic deterrence have remained the foundational pillars for Pakistan’s ambition as a rising middle power

Read More »