Debates are healthy. It makes you aware of the other side of the story. But what is the use of it when someone is not just obsessed with a particular argument but also has fallen prey to non-use of logic. Yes, I’m speaking of Anupam Kher. He’s a great actor, I personally acknowledge his on-screen work.
But, the actor turned patriotic parrot, has not just lowered the standard of debate in India but also raised the level of drama and acting in it. Not one debate can go by where he hasn’t displayed his tremendous acting skills. This article is solely based on one purpose: Finding logic behind Kirron Kher’s husband’s arguments.
Where did it all begin?
So Anupam Kher took out a rally against people who took out rallies against the government. Such logic, much wow. He is quite adamant against shutting people who criticize the present government. Freedom of speech isn’t one of the fundamental rights that he recognizes.
Aamir Khan and other controversies
Almost everybody lost his cool when it was heard that Aamir is thinking about leaving the country. But everybody is not literate like Anupam. He criticized his own co-actor on the issue without even listening to what he had said. And I thought speaking and listening are correlated.
Telegraph Debate Episode
Shit got real serious in this episode. Anupam shouted at and disrespected a former judge. And guess why? He believed that the Judge has disrespected the court and, therefore, he, in turn, shunned the judge. Okay, so who’s disrespecting who? His speech there was filled with anger and emotions. One thing was sure that he did portray himself as a good actor there.
“People who live in luxury speak of nationalism today” this was said by Anupam Kher. I wonder what compelled him to say this. His poverty maybe.
Connecting Anything and Everything with Nationalism
Anupam Kher eats, sleeps, breaths and even farts nationalism, BJP-created-nationalism though. No speech goes by where the use of the word “intolerant” and “nationalism” is not seen. Obsession, one can term.
Yes everybody admires soldiers. Be it a blizzard or a drought, they are always there. But that doesn’t mean that every time you run out of an argument, use the phrase soldiers at border. Anupam Kher ji please stop using soldiers in every argument of yours. Don’t pull the trigger from their shoulders.
Kanhaiya raised an important issue by saying that army is respected but we should talk about soldiers raping women in Kashmir. Guess what Kher did? He tweeted this: “Please do not target the armed forces for your petty politics”
Allegedly? What’s that?
Declaring a person a terrorist or an anti-nationalist depends on the court. NSD is a great school but it doesn’t teach law. Somethings things have to be carried out with due process of law. He claims to respect the decisions of court but seems to forget that it is the court which pronounces a person of sedition and not the general public. The limitations on freedom of restriction mentioned in the Constitution is to be interpreted by the court and not some actor turned pseudo politician.
So absurd to know that Bollywood people have very little knowledge of video editing and photoshop. The JNU issue, for that matter.
Freedom of speech is guaranteed by the soldiers?
When you are standing at the peak of hypothetical nationalism, the only thing visible is your nose. “If there weren’t any soldiers in the nation protecting the borders then we wouldn’t be having freedom of speech” Well, freedom of speech and expression is guaranteed by the constitution and not by our soldiers. It is under article 19(1)(a) to be precise.
A healthy debate requires thorough research and not just eloquent nature. So here’s what I would like to suggest Anupam Kher:
- Go home, do some research
- Buy a dictionary, it has words other than nationalism and intolerance
- Understand and listen to the other side
- Just frickin’ listen
- Be rational
Views presented in the article are those of the author and not of ED.