I can say with confidence that if social scientists would ever venture into researching human behaviour, they might uncover a strange phenomenon. Any time ‘patriotism’ or ‘nationalism’ is introduced or invoked within normal people it yields sudden behavioural shifts. The data would be quite revealing if it were tested prior to and after a particular event. My two-cents bit is that people act in a certain manner that may be irrational or questionable out of certain fears. Those fears may be societal alienation, condemnation or perhaps, a threat of potential violence by their own fellow citizens. The last few weeks have been brutal in terms of psyche of the people of the subcontinent. A lot has been played and, very sadly, negatively played, in every sense of the word. Pakistan and India, the usually contentious neighbours, are at daggers drawn, and the verbal salvos are being endlessly fired from both ends. The idiot box is serving as a launch pad for ‘non-surgical’ yet very lethal strikes. Gone are the days when the pen was mightier than the sword. It is the sharper tongue that has substituted the metallic object, and has become far more lethal than a good old sword. The message emanating from both ends is troubling, and purposely done to build and shape public opinion. The obfuscation narrative of the Indian media is meant to deflect attention from Kashmir and move it towards Pakistan. The sudden advocacy of Balochistan is to shift attention from the excesses in Kashmir. Period. It is downright hypocritical to raise the voice of dissidents of Balochistan while totally silencing the voices of Kashmir. By the way, we are no saints either; it may offend many, but we are equally hypocritical when we show solidarity with Kashmiris yet go mum on human rights violations in Balochistan. So in essence, both countries are involved in a situation to undermine the conditions of their own people. Each takes a stance for the people of the other, but conveniently ignores their own. In the name of nationalism and patriotism, rude and insensitive behaviour is being peddled and imposed on others. A few examples from the world’s largest democracy put its so-called fame to shame. Elements within India that are questioning the veracity of the much-touted “surgical strikes” are being harassed as “Pakistani agents” or “traitors.” India’s popular politician, Arvind Kejriwal, was hugely censured by people because he had questioned the validity of the claims of Indian strikes. In India, the idiot box’s ‘champion’ took a guest off the air just because she was questioning the rationale of the ban on Pakistani artists when things are not as devastating as after Kargil or Mumbai attacks but, of course, no reason or rationale was accepted. To the contrary, she was accused of hurting the sentiments of the parent of a fallen soldier. The famous director who has signed the Pakistani heartthrob in his movies was subject to homophobic insults on social media. The star who opined that Pakistani actors were not terrorists was threatened by a boycott from the ultra-right wing zealots and their popular organisation. The legendary character actor who recently performed in a Pakistani flick, which was in the news just last month, was subjected to similar insults. Again, if you thought that the malaise has only impacted our neighbours, then you are definitely mistaken. Our forces have a department that serves as their arm of public relations, commonly known as the Inter Services Public Relations (ISPR). The ‘birdie’ fame senior analyst, who is mostly reasonable and balanced, in a couple of shows sounding more like the spokesperson of the ISPR, made the proclamation was that our soldiers only fight for one goal and that is martyrdom, and there is no such thing on the other side. This was downright offensive to millions of soldiers on the other side, both non-Muslims and Muslims who serve in uniform. What do they fight for then? Another very senior analyst, a protégé of Maulana Maudoodi, and quite cultured most of the times, took a swipe at Hindus. Though his comment were meant to be funny and sarcastic in response to the loudmouth anchor of the other side but it was still very crass. Not to mention that our country has a few Hindus left who still have their unflinching loyalties to this land. This past weekend when the news of a militant attack in Baramulla broke, another senior anchor seemingly rejoiced about the attack on Twitter, calling it “fantastic.” This gentleman hosts a very popular talk show with a prefix of ‘New’ to its name. And by the way, the same anchor has done many programmes condemning cowardly terrorist attacks on our soil when the militants happen to be Taliban. One can cite more examples, but you get the picture. The madness is mutual, and one can clearly see that it is not going to dissipate. The one-upmanship of who is better than the other when it comes to being patriotic is shameful. The general attitude is equally pathetic as social media is full of jingoistic rhetoric and slogans on both ends. It proves my point that behaviours can change quite rapidly, and objectivity goes into a slumber, all in the name of patriotism. No wonder why there is this famous saying that patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel. The writer is a Pakistani-US mortgage banker. He can be reached at dasghar@aol.com. He tweets at http://twitter.com/dasghar