#BoycottTanishq: A Lost Opportunity

In a group of a few influential people with the same ideology or say mindset, the chances of clashes, the chances of friction are less. That has been the case of our country for the last “70 years”. For the first time, a party of a “Right Wing” ideology has come into power and with a majority. Now for obvious reasons, there is friction developing among the countrymen, which is a good thing. Friction leads to debate, it leads to discussion, and a healthy conversation starts to take place which in turn helps the nation to develop. 

As #BoycottTanishq started trending and gave fumes to the anger of one particular community, the brand had to kneel and pull down the advertisement. The whole incident makes three things very clear a) “Community A” is now not ready to accept anything that is being served to them for ages.  b) They understand the hidden agenda behind advertisements, films, and in general everything and c) that now they even have the power and support to make a brand like Tanishq apologize. 

Dissent is an important part of democracy. It helps in the growth of a nation. But any disagreement should have logical and valid counterpoints. 

The issue in concern “Love Jihad”, I cannot stress enough, is a serious problem, and it needs firm intervention by society. It has destroyed the lives of many girls and made many families suffer. There are various documentaries, books, and researches that are evident in this fact. One of the significant work has been done by the film-maker Sudipto Sen. 

There is definitely money involved in these jihads. The radical people of “Community B” force a woman to convert after so-called “love-marriage” and uses her for the game of population. Kerala and West Bengal are testimony to these facts. 

But now the important question is, was the new ad by Tanishq in any way promoting “Love Jihad” and if it was, shouldn’t it have been countered with facts instead of brainlessly lynching the brand on the internet? 

In the era of the internet, where any information is just one click away, shouldn’t the conversation regarding something so grave as Love Jihad be talked about with facts and valid information? 

In the race of defaming an advertisement, people today lost a great opportunity to start a conversation about a serious problem that is being faced by many innocent girls. The anger, of course, was not on the ad but a genuine issue. But when we link two separate issues as one, the topic which needs immediate action loses focus, and that’s what has happened with the whole debate of Tanishq and Love Jihad. 

The conversation or the debate was not supposed to be about “Community A” and "Community B” it was supposed to be about how some radical people are taking advantage of innocent girls and how an ad is misleading those girls to believe that the world is a safe, happy place where love is indeed just love. 

The ad should have been countered with a split-screen where one shows the ideal situation, and the other shows the ground reality. When there was the nation-wide protest against Sanjay Leela Bhansali's Padmaavat, I came across a very thoughtful way of protesting proposed by late Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee. He said the best way to counter any film, any book, or any poem is to go ahead and make a better one. The same thought could have served a better understanding of the issue of Love Jihad. 

With the kind anger and with the “style” of anger today, we lost two things. One: An opportunity to start a healthy discussion on a serious topic. Two: We allowed those extremists and people with hidden propaganda to backlash the genuine anger. 

Today, the public is aware and is ready to debate from both sides which is indeed a good thing for our country. But it is time that we improve our expression of dissent to start a discussion, a conversation, a debate for a better tomorrow. 

(The views expressed are completely personal. The platform is open for debate. You can reach me at soumya.tare22@gmail.com)

Oh God! Save the monopoly!

“Har cheez ka badla liya toh iska kyu nahi?” Says Deepika Padukone in Ram Leela when Ram and Leela meet after the attack on Leela’s mother. There is this intense scene between the two actors where they blame each other for starting the war first. With exhaustion, at last, Deepika Padukone’s character shouts “Har cheez ka badla liya toh iska kyu nahi?” And narrates every incident where she felt betrayed by Ram.

Today, just like Deepika’s character I feel betrayed by the selective Narrative set by Ranveer’s character in all my friends.

Today, no matter what happens in this country there is only one community which is being targetted and I dare to ask why? 

If my heart cries for the JNU president, why didn’t someone else dared to ask what happened to those 15 ABVP members in the hospital?

If I believe in the accounts given about the incidents by the students of the campus, why then the information provided by the professor of the college on Facebook called a biased perspective?

If I shout the violence in JNU was wrong, why didn’t someone come up to say students disrupting registration process was unethical?

If my sympathies are with Rohit Vemula from Hyderabad, why didn’t there was a Facebook posts flood when Makhanlal was bleeding in the name of casteism?

Why the screenshots shared by one wing are true and rest is just fake journalism?

How no one questions the presence of Yogendra Yadav in JNU in like 10 minutes after the incident but dares to connect everything with RSS and BJP?

Why and how within one night students across the country who have no clue about the situation in JNU gathers in solidarity with JNU and no one questions such immediate reactions but has the courage to question how BJP is using the nankana saheb attack to divert attention from CAA protests?

Where were these people when servers were broken? when students were dined their right to study?

Mumbai protests in the solidarity with JNU but flashes Free Kashmir posters and no one, literally no one questions it. I ask why?

Why? Because democracy is alive until one side of the country is allowed to speak? Because democracy is alive until there is a monopoly of one wing to set the narrative?

Because democracy is alive until you get to choose the topics of discussion?

Recently, I was having a conversation with one of my friend who was leading a protest at his university. He told me why were they protesting, what was the issue etc. What came as shock to me was how the reactions multiple as soon as cameras are on. He told me that when media gathered, I asked my fellow friends to start crying and to fake asthma attacks. He told me how one of the students tore his shirt down and pretended to be beaten up by faculties when the camera was on him.

Just because someone cried on a TV screen doesn’t prove that he is right and the rest of people are not. 

It boils my blood to see my name targeted in any violence that takes place in this country but I keep shut. I keep shut because if I will speak, I will be called communal or a Bhakt but if the tables were turned speaking out Muslim not being a terrorist would have been secular. 

I wonder if Karan Johar would be interested to a make movie called, ‘i am a Hindu, not a terror company.’