The Rise of "Shahbagi Vhuski" and the Power of Cultural Tagging
The Growing Recognition of a Certain Archetype
In recent years, a certain type of ultra-progressive, attention-seeking individual—often associated with radical activism—has increasingly found itself under public scrutiny. These individuals, particularly women, were previously difficult to categorize, as people sensed their disruptive tendencies but struggled to articulate them. However, with the popularization of terms like Shahbagi Vhuski, their behaviours and ideological leanings have become easier to identify, and this shift has led to growing public awareness.
A Personal Encounter: Identifying the Pattern
I recently reconnected with one of my students after a long time. In casual conversation, he mentioned attending an event, only to realize that the entire gathering was filled with Shahbagi individuals. When I asked how he identified them, he described specific behavioural patterns that perfectly matched the stereotype. This anecdote illustrates how public consciousness is shifting—people are no longer confused about these individuals; they can now pinpoint and label them effectively.
Why These Individuals Are More Dangerous Than Traditional Social Ills
Unlike marginalized individuals who engage in morally questionable activities for financial survival, Shahbagi Vhuski types do not operate in private; they seek validation through public chaos. Their primary objective is not personal survival but social engineering—creating disorder, demanding uncritical validation, and silencing dissent. This makes them far more dangerous than conventional figures of moral degradation. While others operate behind closed doors, these individuals disrupt society in broad daylight.
The Validation Obsession and the Fascist Mindset
The core trait of these individuals is their desperate need for validation. They cannot tolerate criticism and demand constant reinforcement from an echo chamber of sycophants. Their behaviour mirrors that of authoritarian figures—insisting that the world accept their views without question while branding any disagreement as oppression. In this context, using terms like Shahbagi Vhuski serves as a necessary cultural resistance against their ideological overreach.
The Necessity of Verbal Counteraction
A debate exists over whether confronting these individuals aggressively might push them further into extremism. Some argue that attacking them verbally will only make them more reactive. However, the reality is that we do not currently possess an effective mechanism for "reforming" them, nor do they show any inclination toward self-correction. Therefore, creating a cultural and verbal counterforce against them is a more sustainable approach.
Why This Approach Works in the Long Run
The majority of people, even if silent, do not align with these radical individuals. While their supporters may have louder voices in the public sphere, this does not mean they represent the majority opinion. The process of categorizing and tagging them helps expose their ideology and ensures that their influence remains limited. Even if some mislabeling (false negatives) occurs in the short term, the broader impact of this strategy is beneficial when analyzed through the lens of Maslaha (public interest) vs. Mafsada (harm prevention).
Exposing Them Through Their Own Reactions
No matter how they respond to such tagging, they ultimately expose themselves further. If they attempt to wear the label with pride and create content around it, they reinforce the perception that they idolize controversial and morally questionable figures. If they remain silent, it signals their defeat in the cultural battle. Either way, those opposing them win by framing the discourse in their favour.
Avoiding Counterproductive Tactics
It is important to note that while resistance is necessary, direct insults or slurs should be avoided. Islamically, verbal slangs is impermissible. However, strategic labelling—when rooted in factual behavioural patterns—is not only permissible but effective like calling Abul Jahl who was used to be called Abul Hakam. The goal is to create a situation where their reaction (whether vocal or silent) ultimately benefits those resisting their influence.
Conclusion: The Cultural Battle Must Be Fought Intelligently
In the long run, people will always criticize counter-movements, calling them reactionary or labelling them as extremist. However, dismissing criticism is essential when the stakes involve social order and ideological resistance. The key is to use strategic language, remain fact-based, and ensure that cultural and verbal opposition systematically limits the influence of these disruptive individuals. Silence is not an option in a war of narratives, and as long as the resistance is structured and thoughtful, it will continue to serve its intended purpose.