What is the thin invisible line linking these unconnected events: the defacing of the Hindi part of signboards in Bengaluru’s Namma Metro, the various incidents of cow vigilantism with accompanying violence and murder, and the aggressive farmer demands for loan waivers, which includes destruction of public and private properties?

The answer lies in a term used in psychology: displaced aggression. It’s about displaying aggression towards the wrong person when the cause that triggered the angry response may be someone or something else. Example: your boss blasts you for something you may not have done, but you can’t give it back to your boss, and so you take it out on a motorcyclist who crosses your path on the way back home. Your anger against the boss was taken out on the motorcyclist.

This is not to suggest that Hindi is not being imposed on the non-Hindi speaking peoples, or that those who revere the cow have no grievance, or even that farmers are not in deep financial trouble. But the aggressive response in a misplaced direction relates less to the real problem one must address and more to the feeling of impotence attached to something you cannot easily resolve.

One part of the anger against “Hindi imposition” is real, for the Union government often tries to do this by privileging Hindi over regional languages in its official language policy; but the real anger a Kannadiga may feel may be about something more emotional. After Independence, India has seen four or five generations pass, and by now it is obvious that English is the language of aspiration and advancement. If, in the first two or three generations, Kannadigas would have been comfortable conversing in their mother tongue, today’s young Kannadiga is more comfortable in English. In fact, in the fifth generation, Kannada knowledge is probably in decline among middle class families. Soon this will be the case with almost all classes, including the poor.

It is this sense of current and future cultural loss that makes the Kannadiga angry and Hindi is where his anger is getting directed. A little thought will tell him that the same insecurities about cultural preservation are also bothering the Hindi-wallahs. The Hindi-speaking states are worried that English is gradually taking centre-stage, and if remains the language of advancement, subsequent generations of Hindi-speaking youth will lose their comfort with Hindi.

We must address the core concerns about culture and language if we are not to let insecurities turn into mindless demonisation of other languages or even English. But solutions can only be long-term. It needs the state to actively promote its regional language, both to its own people and to immigrants. It needs to spend money and effort in creating scholarship and genuine love for the language which can then hold its own against English or Hindi. But long-term solutions are not what politicians can offer in a five-year term. They thus tap into the insecurities and channel it towards visible symbols like Namma Metro signages, instead of doing what needs to be done. They use the people’s emotional insecurities to divert their anger elsewhere.

The same logic applies to the current bout of violence involving gau rakshaks and alleged cow smugglers. While some of the violence is likely to be a mere continuation of what always used to happen in the past, some of it – and the excessive attention media is paying to it – is cussedness about perpetuating this violence in the belief that it affects Muslims more.

Indian “secularism” has damaged the Hindu psyche more than that of the other religions. The real underlying emotion driving this excess attachment to gau raksha is not the Hindu feeling of reverence for the cow, but something else: it is the active discrimination and demonisation of Hinduism that has become part and parcel of our phony secularism and the pandering to minority communalism. This is resulting in displaced aggression towards Muslims. Hence the great interest among Hindu groups for a uniform civil code.

Phony secularists do not think twice about repeatedly demonising Hindus by using the caste stick to beat them with, but any critique of minority religions is hate speech. The phony secularist will never be part of any legitimate Hindu cause, including those that will not impact minority rights negatively. For example, the secularist will never concern himself with the trampling of Hindu community rights through the appropriation of temple funds and management by the state in several parts of the country, when neither churches nor mosques are subject to the same regimen. The constitutional provisions that were intended to ensure that minorities suffer no discrimination in running their cultural, educational and religions institutions have been taken to mean majority institutions require no such autonomy. Even laws to prevent cow slaughter remain only on paper. Little wonder that the hidden anger among Hindus is surfacing in issues like cow protection.

The average Hindu, despite his reverence for the cow, ultimately treats the cow as an economic animal. But he is now becoming a cussed supporter of mindless slaughter bans precisely because his real emotional needs – of treating Hinduism with respect, and ensuring autonomy for his own institutions – are being trampled upon by a deracinated English-speaking elite and politicians seeking the minority vote.

The same logic applies to farm loan waivers. The average farmer know that loan waivers cannot offer real solutions to the problem of unviable farming; if this keeps happening, no bank will want to lend to farmers. If loans effectively become grants, the money must come from government, not banks. But fixing the problem of unviable farming needs a long-term approach, where land is consolidated and its productivity improved through higher investment in irrigation, water conservation, and roads infrastructure. Non-agricultural jobs have to be expanded to absorb surplus labour by amending restrictive labour laws. Farmers need to be able to enter into long-term contracts for selling their produce with large buyers like retailers, among other things. Loan waivers are a one-time relief that do nothing for the fundamental problem. But politicians with a short electoral timeframe will demand loan waivers and incite farmers to violence to claim they did something for them. Displaced aggression, like the blocking of highways and burning trucks and throwing rotting potatoes and tomatoes on roads, is the result.

Isn’t it time we paid heed to the underlying causes instead of allowing them to fester and periodically erupt in the form of displaced aggression?