Trump, Modi, Pink and Fawad Khan

COMMENTARY

Trump, Modi, Pink and Fawad Khan

September has been very Rangeen (colorful)

All views are personal

By Meena Yeggina

As Martin Luther King, Jr once said, "Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter."

So here I am crossing the border between silence and safety and the un- known world of controversy, criticism and even rage. Particularly about Trump and Modi - conversations over whom allegedly families, love-lives and friendships have been been shattered). I have noticed several disturbing parallels between the two, and not sharing them to the initiated felt like too big a moral burden. So here goes:

To begin with, it was wonderful watching the presidential debate: To see Trump loosing his cool, mocking Clinton in a slanting, cheesy gerateful posture, not to mention his crumbling on facts and vocabulary, was a treat to my eyes. He completely proved my strong belief that he doesn't deserve to become the President of this great nation, which stands to be the greatest democracy. That's why we all are here, right? To reap that freedom? But here is a man, preying on the fears of some regarding safety and finances, while also harboring a huge hatred for minorities and immigrants wanting to lead this country - an umbrella for many ethnic groups and communities that come here in search of better lives in a free, fearless and equal society. As an Indian Hindu Immigrant, I become extremely scared of Trump and his petty, fear- mongering politics. I don't think he will do any good to my children, or me, by denying access to other hopeful immigrants. And if a man hates one community what is the guarantee the he wouldn't others like us later, once his goal is achieved? Fact is Trump's racial prejudice is a recorded fact. Writes Nicholas Kristof in New York Times:

Frankly, we should be discomfited that many Americans have absorbed the idea that Hillary Clinton is less honest than Donald Trump, giving Trump an edge in polls of trustworthiness.

Hello? There is no comparison.
One commonly cited example of Clinton's lying is her false claim in 2008 that when she was first lady she came under sniper fire after her plane landed in Bosnia. In contrast, with Trump, you don't need to go back eight years: One examination found he averages a lie or an inaccuracy in every five minutes of speaking. 

(http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/25/opinion/sunday/how-to-cover-a-charlatan-like-trump.html?_r=0)

Under these circumstances, I was thrilled to watch him fall bit by bit and expose himself to attacks of rage, anger, lies and worse, bad vocabulary. Easily rattled and forced to backtrack several times, he looked petty and defensive. After that debate, I knew no fairminded person could waste their vote on him. Nevertheless, there indeed are several Hindu groups supporting him in the US and in India and that is extremely worrisome. Several studies declare that educated Americans are against him and that it is the scared uneducated who prefer him. That study definitely is confusing, considering the fact that many Hindu engineers and doctors are crazy about Trump. It could be due to his promise of tax cuts and immigration laws or his fascist pull. Fear, nationalism, fascism and religion are like opium, to borrow from the words of Karl Marx, and act as a temporary yet strong forces of vote banks. Even the financial promises of Trump are riddled with controversies, so much so that economists are acutely skeptical of the financial gains of such cuts that will make rich richer and poor poorer.

Trump's theory of "trickle down" economics is hard, if not impossible, to achieve. The millions of jobs under Trump's presidency is just an electoral myth repeated rhetorically to make it seem true
(http://thewire.in/70777/can-trump-create-millions-jobs-dont-bet/).

Unfortunately, like Modi, Trump also has become a prisoner of his own image - the "duplicitous demagogues,"; as such, his fall in the presidential debate thus is a feast to my eyes.

In fact I wondered how he could really come this far! I reveled in the fact that "Donald J. Trump's support has "plunged across the swing-state map over the last ten days, wiping out his political recovery from September and threatening to undo weeks of Republican gains in the battle for control of Congress," as reported in the New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/06/us/politics/donald-trump-campaign.htmll

Thank God for small mercies, wisdom prevailed! Clinton speaks of equality of all ethnic groups and races, taxing the rich, global inclusiveness and women's rights. She looks confident and knows her facts. She makes me feel safe and secure. For now her promises looks much better than Trump's misplaced fear tactics, misogynistic states, racial rowdiness, fascist sentiments and fake enragement over immigration.

That brings me to our PM Narendra Modi, and the game he is playing with his well-publicized "surgical strikes" through the Indian army under his leadership on Pakistan's terror camps.

Here, one should not forget that Modi is lovingly termed as Mr. Feku by a lot of people from Patels in Gujarat to students in JNU, Delhi. Many doubt the authenticity of his degrees and his claims of Gujarat Model. His ministers themselves are involved in many alleged fake stories.

Just as he did in 2002 as the CM of Gujarat right before elections by raking up Hindu-Muslim riots, thus seemingly becoming the trumped up "Hindu Hridaya Samrat," (winner of Hindu Hearts), he is now notching up the game by raking in the Jammu and Kashmir Uri terrorist attacks and Pakistan conflict just before the prestigious Uttar Pradesh elections. To any objective viewer all this seems a well- planned strategy by Modi-Shah duo, much as they did in Gujarat. Remember the case of Ishrat Jahan, a 19-year-old student killed in encounter by the police? Those killed in the incident were Ishrat Jahan Raza, a 19-year-old woman from Mumbra, Maharashtra, and three men – Javed Ghulam Sheikh (born Pranesh Pillai), Amjad Ali Rana and Zeeshan Johar. The police claimed that Ishrat Jahan and her associates were Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) operatives involved in a plot to assassinate the Chief Minister of Gujarat, Narendra Modi. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ishrat_Jahan_case). The CBI declared that the encounter was staged, but did not comment on whether Ishrat Jahan was a LeT associate or not. Such alleged planted stories by the wonderful Modi Shah duo, notorious in the la-la land of Gujarat where the police and bureaucracy were misued to benefit the ruling BJP under Modi. (Gujarat Files, Rana Ayyuub) And now, at a time, when the so called Gujarat Development Model is also proving to be a huge myth, according to several reports, added to the failures of Make in India and other such projects, Gau Rakhsak controversies, student, Patidar, Maratha and more strikingly the Dalit agitations, setting Modi on the back foot, Surgical Strikes come as turning of tide of sorts. Recently, several rallies by the BJP headed by Amit Shah were boycotted and shouted out. At this juncture, when the winning UP elections seemed like a distant dream, the BJP upped the ante on terrorists and border security. Uri terror attacks happened where 19 Indian soldiers were killed. Security was questioned but even before proper investigations were conducted as to who attacked Uri, government declared Pakistan as the perpetrator. Pakistan immediately declined and even offered to have an object body such as UN as a non--partisan investigative body to find out who killed Indian soldiers in Uri.

India, curiously refused. Meanwhile, even a month ahead of Uri attack, articles appeared in Times of India proclaiming that BJP is planning some security attacks in Jammu and Kashmir to facilitate UP elections. An overt surgical strike by the Indian Army was announced. And the opposition saw red! Knowing Modi-Shah's strategies well, they took to criticisms of the BJP leadership, while praising the Army itself. Doubts were raised regarding Modi's intentions. See
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/meerut/Rajnath-for-CM-chorus-grows-in-UP%20BJP/articleshow/52713712.cms?utm_source=toimobile&utm_medium=Twitter&utm_campaign=referral

Modi, is accused of using the tensions in the border to win elections, thus playing up to the gallery of Indian audience.

It's definitely sad and heart wrenching to see the political game played out by the BJP behind the shoulders of the Indian Army.

Yet these controversies couldn't stop both Trump and Modi becoming the heros of many millions!

In the midst of this political drama and tension arrives a wonderful yet disturbing movie on the issue of sexual consent called Pink. I enjoyed every minute of it irrespective of the fact that it was helmed by a man and championed by yet another man. It didn't matter. In fact, that the fight was lead by a strong and reliable Amitabh Bacchan gives validity and credibility to the fight against sexism, chauvinism, gender prejudice and misogyny. His stature in general and his pro-found acting makes all to sit up and listen to a simple message the film wants to knock into the minds of an Indian male that A No is a No. It doesn't matter if the woman is sexually active, if she wears"decent" clothes or not, if she is a wife or a whore, if she is rich or poor or drinks or smokes. A NO IS A NO. That's it, as simple as that. This message came loud and clear through a movie in the US called the The Accused by Jonathan Kaplan in 1988, almost 30 years ago. Jodie Foster was brilliant and won several awards for it. It made a huge impact on my young life at that time and answered many of my questions and explained the fault lines of our society. 30 years from then, India's similar Pink, tries to breakdown the barriers laid down on women. What attracts me to this movie is the simplicity of the narration, without any artificial endowments, pseudo intellect and chest-thumping cigarette- smoking feminists. (Why all female activists are shown smoking and drinking and the victims sari clad and demure is another misogyny that films have corrupted feminism of). The three girls in this movie are simple souls just like yours or my daughter, free, fun loving and wanting to live life to the fullest kind of human beings. They don't know how to deal with police or the law. That's not their domain. Even if they do come across the law they expect fair judgment. But the whole incident perturbs them to the core and get shockingly dismayed at the way their country and bureaucracy let them down. Like Arnab Goswami's illiterate Journalism and wrapped logic, the courts, lawyers and society including their own families judge them, look down upon them and shame them for being what they are and wanting what they want in a seemingly fair and equal society.

The movie through its simple dialogues and gripping court drama, which must have taken a few years (you see the girls growing and the wounds vanishing), does justice to the cause. But unfortunately in the real world for many little girls on the GB Road, those working women who would like to simply have a good time, or to those who just sit at home but still are abused, an Amithab Bachchan is difficult to come by to rescue. But through the movie a difficult to understand message in the hugely misogynist country like India is drilled into the heads by the able director.

Last but not the least and completely out of context is my worry about my dear Fawad Khan. My sincere request to all those nationalists of India: Please don't drive away my eye candy with reasonable acting skills from Bollywood. Please. Send away all the others to Pakistan if you must. But let Fawad be. In a world of Bollywood where ugly (Arjun Kapoor), lazy (Abhishek Bachchan), and feminine looking (Tiger Shroff) are ruling the industry (and many more) in the name of family links, Fawad Khan is a rare luxury and women want to see him more and more. Please spare him. In the name of God!