“Jab sarkaarein badalti hain, toh sabse pehle badalta hai syllabus, aur phir badalta hai media.” (Meaning: When governments change, the first thing that changes is syllabus and then it is the media.)
Lovers of History, Politics, Philosophy, films and Economics, unite!
Today, we are going to attempt to dissect the current political scenario, in terms of films. First off, if you’ve been paying attention to that which is currently going on in the country, in terms of cinema, the past few releases have been very desh-bhakti inducing, specifically films such as “Uri” and “Thackeray” or even “Manikarnika”; the kind which, when you leave the theatre, leave you with a sense of pride and happiness and raging hormones of ‘josh’. On the other hand, films like “The Accidental Prime Minister” make you believe we are currently in very good hands.
Now, I’d thought of writing about this article a while ago, and came to the conclusion that in order to refute, one must research first. Hence, I went to watch these films. Hence, although the views presented in this article are personal, they are backed by evidence. I have not watched “Manikarnika” and “The Accidental Prime Minister” yet, and so I will only limit this article to “Uri” and “Thackeray”.
In the most recent decision of the Supreme Court, playing the National Anthem before a film starts was deemed not compulsory. In their judgement, they said playing the National Anthem is unnecessary in a cinema hall as people go there to enjoy a film, and because it also curbs personal freedom. Playing the national anthem in theatres at the end of the film was given up some three decades ago in most parts of the country, largely as a result of the tendency of a section of the audience to walk out. To reintroduce it now gives the impression that cinemas should forever be the main sites for the demonstration of patriotism.
Matters such as commercial exploitation and dramatization of the anthem cannot be the subject of blanket interim orders in a public interest petition. This is not something that can be enforced by judicial diktat, or by making cinema halls the playground for a misplaced sense of patriotism. Nonetheless, this theatre did play the anthem because furniture is expensive and no one wants to be called anti-national.
Movie One Starts. This Is “Uri”
Now, don’t take me wrong, I understand the surgical strike was necessary, I applaud the precision of the attack, and the danger faced by the army. I agree that India as a nation must never start a fight, but have the courage to finish it. It is a great film, I love the music, the actors did a fine job, it’s all smiles and grins until you actually put this into perspective.
For starters, was the surgical strike necessary? Yes. Have we done similar operations in the past? Yes. What sets this event apart, in that case? For starters, never before did the ruling government take credit for an army operation of such kind. Why do you think they took complete and absolute credit?
I believe the then political scenario had something to do with this. The strike was done on September 29, 2016. The year had started with the suicide of Rohith Vemula, which sparked a sense of hostility in the citizens, just a while before this, the Goods and Services Tax had been launched in the country, which was not accepted with the enthusiasm expected, an Indian Air Force aircraft went missing and all aboard were assumed dead; the point I am trying to make is, a lot of turmoil was plaguing the nation. What do you do when things are going astray and you feel people are losing faith in you? You make one move that would make them forget, or temporarily bring you back in focus.
See, the main strength of this government, which made them win the 2014 elections, was that they had in their pockets, the ace called PR. Everything they did was portrayed in a light of love for the nation. We are a land of emotion, things like these stir us. But, what happens when people with such ideology and hunger for power start to run your country? You’re suddenly left wondering why half of your educated population feels claustrophobic, why a country which has regularly boasted about being a diverse nation is suddenly changing names of its cities, or why religious institutions are broken down and sentiments are hurt through just words, why riots break out every now and then, the grower of crops is starving; but somehow, this man with the rags to the riches story is only getting credit and appreciation.
You start to wonder what kind of a world you live in where similar thinking people are powerful enough to run nations at large. It only goes on to show that the world is not in good hands, and things need to change.
The General Elections are approaching. When I ask people who they would vote for, they say “things could be worse.” What I don’t understand is, why are we okay with the state we are in, only when we compare it to worse?
Movie Two: “Thackeray”
By the time I got to movie two, which was Thackeray, I was only wondering why someone as ‘woke’ as Nawaz would do this. But you have to admit, commercializing sentiments of a seeming majority will always fetch good money, and you have to be stupid to reject such an offer.
Now, Bal Thackeray was a cartoonist who was upset that the Marathi manus wasn’t getting his due in his own city, and wanted to shoo the strangers away. How did he do this? He launched a weekly, which said if you have to, use violence but get your right. Later, he formed the Shiv Sena, which initially was done to secure justice for one section of society, but eventually went astray from its path. The man, in court, makes a great speech about how one must not believe in democracy because what has democracy done for us all this while. He seems proud of the fact that his boys went ahead and tore down the Babri Masjid because people told him that was Ram’s birthplace. When asked for evidence, he says, why would a bhakt lie? Call me paranoid, but am I the only one who sees a problem with this attitude and mentality?
Problems don’t solve themselves. They require effort, and patience, an open mind. Taking up arms and intimidating/killing the enemy is as futile as the saying the purpose of war is peace. Being a powerful, relatable orator makes one powerful, because if you can move someone emotionally, you can make them do anything. We need to make this our strength, and educate, not exploit.
In conclusion, the elections are approaching. We have, in the past, forgotten and forgiven our wrongdoers. Let’s not do this again. Let’s please work towards fixing this mess, and let’s start now.
All my support to anyone who works for social empowerment and upliftment, but I think we don’t really need to talk in favor of the unempowered- we just need to pass the mic.
The post Lights, Camera, Propaganda! appeared first and originally on Youth Ki Awaaz and is a copyright of the same. Please do not republish.