Hindu vigilantes have long tried to stop the cow trade, often carried out by Muslims, but have become more extreme and flamboyant thanks to American social media platforms that reward them with large online followings.
Hindu vigilantes have long tried to stop the cow trade, often carried out by Muslims, but have become more extreme and flamboyant thanks to American social media platforms that reward them with large online followings.
The second clause doesn’t have any connection at all to the context of the article. The person who happen to be a Muslim is a victim in this article, not a perpetrator. It’s like saying, “hey this is a follower of a harmful religion. So he somehow deserve it.” And, it’s somehow ironic when the harmful act conducted by the perpetrator is by a person following a teaching of a certain religion, Hinduism in this case, but that religion is not even mentioned as harmful.
My take: There’s some kind of bias or phobia that can be interpreted from that statement.
By contrast, if the same statement is made based on a news article on ISIS terrorists, it would make sense and won’t get downvoted.
Yeah, it’s not like only muslims eat cows. Replace them with any other group and the vigilante would still after them for trading cows.