Betrayal Worse Than Robbery: Intellectual Treachery and the Struggle for Public Truth

Rahul Ramya

20.092025

In most cases today, journalists and writers—whether regular or occasional, professional or amateur—resort to politically correct language even when addressing the most contested and divisive ideas. This is not a matter of stylistic caution alone; it signals a deeper malaise. What should have been a space for fearless truth-telling has become one of docility and, at times, open sycophancy. This represents a subtle but potent dimension of authoritarianism in intellectual life: the surrender of honesty and integrity at the altar of power.

Treachery Beyond Robbery

When intellectuals and media betray ordinary people, the damage they inflict is deeper than material harm. A thief steals wealth, but treacherous thinkers steal trust, corrupt language, and cripple the very compass by which societies navigate. In robbery, brute force is visible, and fear is acknowledged; in betrayal, the violence is quieter, cloaked in politeness, hidden in footnotes and headlines. A robber confronts you directly; a treacherous intellectual stabs from behind.

The betrayal of truth is not a new phenomenon, but in our age it has acquired a sharper edge. The use of politically correct language to mask inconvenient realities, the twisting of facts into “underbaked truths,” and the silence of professional voices in the face of state excesses represent not just cowardice but complicity. Betrayal in the realm of ideas is more dangerous than robbery in the streets because it disarms citizens, turning them blind in a battlefield where power manipulates perception itself.

Philosophers provide us with the tools to frame this. Hannah Arendt reminded us that truth has always been fragile in politics, yet its suppression leads inevitably to tyranny. Antonio Gramsci distinguished between “organic intellectuals,” rooted in people’s struggles, and “compromised intellectuals,” captured by elites. Amartya Sen emphasized that democracy lives not in perfect justice but in the continuous removal of visible injustice through public reasoning. Betrayal of truth by intellectuals, therefore, is not merely a lapse in judgment—it is a political crime against the possibility of justice itself.

The Role of Intellectuals and Media in Democracy

Democracy depends on more than votes. It depends on an informed citizenry able to evaluate competing claims. Here, journalists and intellectuals act as translators between complex realities and public understanding. They are supposed to test power against fact, to challenge ideology with evidence, and to refuse silence in the face of abuse.

When these mediators surrender their role, democracy’s foundation cracks. Betrayal can take many forms: silence in the face of brutality, selective presentation of facts, opportunistic shifts with political winds, or outright cheerleading for rulers. All amount to the same treachery: abandonment of responsibility to truth.

Shoshana Zuboff’s analysis of “surveillance capitalism” shows that betrayal today is not limited to intellectuals in newspapers or universities. Platforms that shape information flows are themselves complicit in distorting truth, manipulating behavior, and concentrating power. Thus, betrayal in the age of algorithms acquires a dual form: human sycophancy and machine-driven distortion.

Forms of Betrayal: From Silence to Underbaked Truths

Betrayal is not always dramatic. It often arrives as docility—the refusal to question, the willingness to adopt “safe” language that avoids offense to power. This is the betrayal of silence.

Other times, betrayal takes the form of twisting reality into what we may call “underbaked truths.” These are half-cooked narratives—selective, partial, incomplete—that pretend to be factual but serve the state’s agenda. Unlike outright falsehoods, they are dangerous precisely because they contain fragments of truth. They prepare the ground for the full descent into post-truth politics, where facts no longer matter, and loyalty to “us versus them” narratives becomes the only currency.

Ece Temelkuran’s analysis of Turkey captures this trajectory. Before the rise of post-truth, intellectuals and journalists served half-truths. They amplified government narratives, avoided uncomfortable topics, and created an atmosphere where questioning was equated with betrayal of the nation. This docility paved the way for the politics of polarization. Ordinary citizens, deprived of neutral mediators, were forced to choose camps—each living in its own distorted reality. Betrayal here was not merely silence but active complicity in erecting the architecture of division.

Case Studies of Betrayal

India: Colonial Writers, the Emergency Crawl, and Modi-Era Sycophancy

India provides three vivid historical periods where betrayal of intellectuals shaped political outcomes.

1. Colonial Writers: During British rule, a section of communal intellectuals and journalists actively supported colonial narratives, portraying anti-colonial resistance as dangerous fanaticism. By producing underbaked truths about Hindu–Muslim relations, they reinforced the “divide and rule” strategy, betraying not only their country but also future generations who inherited hardened communal identities.
   
   

2. The Emergency (1975–77): Indira Gandhi’s Emergency revealed the intellectual class’s vulnerability. Most newspapers and writers crawled when asked only to bend. Fear of censorship and loss of patronage led to an unprecedented betrayal of readers. Underground presses emerged, but the mainstream mostly surrendered. This betrayal was not forced robbery but voluntary treachery.
   
   

3. The Modi Period: Contemporary India witnesses a similar pattern. Many journalists and intellectuals adopt self-censorship, using euphemisms to describe violence, ignoring uncomfortable facts, and amplifying government achievements without scrutiny. A few courageous voices remain, but the mainstream is marked by docility. Here betrayal feeds directly into the machinery of polarization, turning citizens into consumers of propaganda rather than participants in reasoned debate.
   
   

Latin America: Dictatorship and Populism

Latin America’s history shows how betrayal adapts across eras.

• Chile under Pinochet: Many intellectuals were silenced, exiled, or co-opted. The media that survived often became mouthpieces of the regime, legitimizing repression as economic modernization. Citizens lost their mediators of truth, and opposition voices were forced underground.
  
  

• Brazil under Bolsonaro: Betrayal took a subtler form. Sections of the media amplified Bolsonaro’s narratives of crime, corruption, and cultural threat, presenting underbaked truths that legitimized authoritarian policies. Intellectuals who sought favor with power avoided confronting the destruction of democratic norms. The betrayal was not totalitarian silencing but populist distortion.
  
  

Eastern Europe: Hungary and Poland

• Hungary under Viktor Orbán: Independent media has been systematically captured, turned into amplifiers of government ideology. Intellectual betrayal here is institutional, not individual—whole outlets are converted into propaganda machines.
  
  

• Poland under Law and Justice Party: Public broadcasting was transformed into partisan machinery. Many writers aligned themselves with the ruling ideology, betraying their role as critical mediators. Citizens again were left with polarized narratives instead of shared truths.
  
  

United States: Nixon and Trump

• Nixon sought to discipline campuses during the Vietnam War, using regulations to curb dissent. His attacks on the press as enemies of the people set a template for future betrayal. Intellectual freedom was treated as a threat to state security.
  
  

• Trump pushed betrayal into the digital age. He popularized “fake news” as a label for all criticism, promoted deepfakes and conspiracy theories, and tolerated the weaponization of hate speech on social media. His era demonstrated how betrayal of truth is not just about silence but also about active production of falsehoods. During his second campaign, concerns grew sharper: AI-generated misinformation, targeted disinformation, and attempts to police campus dissent combined into a full-spectrum assault on public truth.
  
  

Public Space as a Democratic Safety Valve

Why does betrayal matter so much? Because public truth is the oxygen of democracy. Hannah Arendt called politics the “space of appearance”—a public realm where people see and hear each other, where reality is shared. Jürgen Habermas described the “public sphere” as the forum for rational debate, without which democracy collapses into manipulation.

When intellectuals betray, they poison this space. When the state censors, it closes it. Yet human societies always seek new spaces. In the digital age, social media became the substitute agora—the fragile but vital arena where grievances are aired, solidarity built, and rulers held accountable.

South Asia’s Digital Battles

Bangladesh

Mainstream media often avoided challenging Sheikh Hasina’s government. During the 2018 student protests, young people turned to social media to broadcast police brutality and organize rallies. When the government throttled the internet, resistance weakened.

Later, after Hasina’s removal, social media did not restore truth but birthed new betrayals: post-truth campaigns against minorities flourished, showing that betrayal can shift hosts but remain alive. Here intellectual treachery migrated from docile newspapers to unregulated digital platforms.

Nepal

The fall of KP Oli’s government was marked by violence on streets and online. Social media amplified discontent but also deepened factionalism. Opportunistic intellectuals shifted positions with power, leaving citizens without trustworthy mediators. Betrayal here was not silence but opportunism, reinforcing public disorientation.

The Weaponization of Shutdowns and Censorship

Authoritarian regimes have learned that controlling public space no longer requires seizing printing presses or occupying universities. A simple internet shutdown can erase millions of voices overnight.

• India: The abrogation of Article 370 in 2019 brought the longest internet shutdown in democratic history. Blackouts during farmer protests and communal clashes show the state’s recognition of social media as the new protest square.
  
  

• Bangladesh: Internet slowdowns and platform restrictions during protests exposed the fragility of digital resistance.
  
  

• Myanmar: After the 2021 coup, the junta shut down the internet, forcing protesters back to leaflets.
  
  

• Iran: Protesters after Mahsa Amini’s killing resisted through VPNs and encrypted platforms, turning technology itself into a site of struggle.
  
  

• United Kingdom: During the 2011 London riots, leaders debated shutting down Twitter—proof that even democracies feel threatened by uncontrolled digital spaces.
  
  

The Paradox of Suppression

Suppression may silence noise, but it cannot erase grievances. Kashmiris under blackout did not reconcile; they grew more alienated. Bangladeshi students did not abandon their anger; they stored it. Nepal’s youth did not forget demands; they redirected them.

Suppression defers dissent but intensifies it. Pressure builds in silence, and when it erupts, it does so with greater fury and less trust. By betraying truth and closing spaces, rulers do not secure stability—they destroy it.

Digital Authoritarianism and Surveillance Capitalism

In the age of algorithms, betrayal takes a new form. Platforms driven by profit manipulate behavior, prioritize outrage, and amplify polarization. Shoshana Zuboff warns that surveillance capitalism commodifies human experience itself, turning truth into a resource for manipulation.

Thus, betrayal today is double-edged: intellectuals betray by silence or opportunism, while platforms betray by distortion and manipulation. Citizens are caught in a pincer: abandoned by human mediators and misled by algorithmic ones.

Beyond Betrayal: Paths of Resistance

What, then, is the cure?

Amartya Sen reminds us that justice is not perfection but removal of visible injustices. Intellectual betrayal is one such manifest injustice. Its cure is not grand reform but small, continuous acts of courage. Journalists who publish inconvenient facts, writers who resist patronage, citizens who create alternative forums—all represent steps toward reclaiming truth.

History provides examples. Underground presses during India’s Emergency. Samizdat publications in Soviet Eastern Europe. Iranian protesters who bypass censorship with VPNs. Young Indian journalists who document hate crimes despite threats. These acts are not isolated heroism but necessary sparks that keep democracy alive.

Arendt emphasized that politics requires appearance—speaking and being heard. Betrayal silences appearance; resistance restores it.

The Shame of Treachery, the Power of Resistance

The greatest shame of our age is not that rulers attempt to control truth—that instinct is ancient. The shame is that intellectuals, who ought to defend truth, often betray it. Their treachery is worse than robbery. Robbers steal possessions; betrayers steal society’s compass. Robbers frighten openly; betrayers lull us with politeness, leaving us blind to manipulation.

But history also whispers hope. Each time intellectuals betrayed, others resisted. Each time rulers censored, citizens found new spaces. Each time underbaked truths prepared post-truth, counter-voices worked to expose them.

Democracy does not need perfect intellectuals. It needs refusal to betray. It needs courage to name treachery when it appears, vigilance to defend public spaces, and creativity to resist manipulation. For betrayal by the pen is the quietest crime—but also the one democracy cannot survive without resistance.