In Gujarat, Hindu militants in broad daylight butchered a father who was on his way to work. In revenge, Muslim militants killed a woman and her child with machetes in a nearby village. Elsewhere, in Poso-Sulawesi, Indonesia, Islamic extremists beheaded three girls.

In India, the killers saw a Muslim man, not a father or a poor labourer. In the village, they saw a Hindu, not a mother nursing a child. In Poso, they saw Christians, not three teenagers in uniform walking to school. This singular identity defined by religion and ethnicity has stoked hatred and horrendous killings throughout human history, most recent in 1994 between the Tutsis and Hutus in Rwanda.

In his book ‘Identity and Violence: The Illusion of Destiny’ (2006), Amartya Sen explains that when the many facets of human identities are “singularised” into exclusive ethnicity or religion, when “multi-dimensional human beings” are reduced into “one-dimensional creatures”, it diminishes us all.

The cultivation of a singular identity is so effective in inciting racial-religious hatred and hate politics because, as Sen theorises, it crowds out our “freedom to think”, it kills the “possibility of composed reasoning” among us. It blinds us to the values and aspirations that make us human, that which bind us to a common humanity.

It’s plausible that exclusive ethno-religious identity that’s burnished into the psyche usually leads to bigotry, racism and in many cases, horrendous violence. The vulnerable ones are easily exposed to religious and ideological manipulation. And, the bigots are like powder kegs, eternally on edge, waiting for the moment to explode.

We see this all in last week’s protests by a group of Muslims at Section 23 Shah Alam caught on tape by Malaysiakini.

The wanton desecration of Hinduism’s sacred animal may not be paraded by kris-wielding zealots goose-stepping the streets of Shah Alam baying for Hindu blood. But the vile speech, seething hatred and hysterical stomping on a severed cow’s head reveal the many medieval bonkers and closet jihadists who fester below the façade of a modern township.

Brazen blasphemy

The brazen blasphemy of Hinduism by the protesters with their berserk claims to religious territorial rights shows that under the songkok and white skull cap lies not a learned mind enlightened by the holy tenets of the Quran but a headful of paranoia steeped in racism and false teachings.

The protesters’ claim to an Islamic turf in Section 23 – and Shah Alam generally - serves to reinforce in the public mind that Islam is inherently a belligerent religion predisposed to bloody acts and maim. If that is how we see Islam and Muslims, then we’re diminishing and betraying our capacity to build bridges across faith and racial lines.

Let us not lose sight of the fundamental teachings of communal peace by Prophet Muhammad, the wisdom of Islamic culture, civilisation and attainments in science, mathematics, philosophy and astronomy.

The reader reactions to Malaysiakini’s report point to these questions: What has emboldened the protesters to threaten to spill blood if the local government allows a Hindu temple to be built in Section 23? Will we see the protesters charged and jailed for vilifying and threatening the security of the Indian community?

The government’s soft approach to Islamic militants and selective application of the security laws has arguably emboldened the zealots to blaspheme and go bonkers in threatening non-Malay communities to follow ‘our rules – or else’.

In celebrating our 52nd Merdeka today, let us re-calibrate our moral bearings. This is the time for journalists from mainstream and online media to take stock and write – on behalf of their readers – and reach out across faith lines and ethnic boundaries.

We all have an obligation to work towards a more open society. This is where committed journalism can serve us well by reflecting on plausible answers to some questions that irk Malaysians at home and abroad: What has given rise to the domestic surge in Islamic extremism? Apart from the mega projects, what have we really achieved in our social capital after 52 years of independence?