Control is key!

La Luna (2023)

Director: M. Raihan Halim

It is not just confined to one religion; it so happens that Islam is the reference in this film. Leaders of any religion, way of life, or cult take it upon themselves to be the de facto spokesperson on how the religion should be practised. They want to have the final say as if they had an audience with the Almighty, who whispered the secrets of life in their ears. 

To the young and restless, they give the impression that their lifelong purpose in life is to screw up everybody's happiness. Just to show who is the boss. 

Take this example. Occasionally, at the temple I sometimes frequent, there will be public service announcements of some good news or achievements. Naturally, the congregation would display their pleasure and admiration by clapping. That was the most natural thing for us humans to do. "But no!" said one elder, who raised his hands angrily to stop them from clapping. Strangely, a few minutes later, everyone was seen ecstatic, clapping and chanting to chants of 'Hare Rama Hare Krishna'. Nobody seems to know that there is such a rule and the rationale for having one when I ask around. After all, how does clapping in felicitations differ from the one during the recital of hymns? Finally, a very senior attendee just said that it was traditional. Period.

The lesson from this example is that people put rules and regulations in place because they can and want to. It is all about control and showing who is the boss.

This film got many of the religious people hot under the garbs. This comedy questions our blind faith and how leaders use it for selfish needs.

Kampong Bras Basah is a closely knitted village overseen by the conservative local holy man. He determines what is preached in the Friday prayers and micromanages peoples' affairs. Troubles come knocking when a plucky young lady starts her lingerie business in the village. Even though initially the villagers looked at the shop with scorn, they eventually flocked to the shop when one of the couples in the village showed remarkable improvement in their intimate relationships. The holy man digs up his sleeves to shut down the business. The storyline includes hints of spousal abuse, women empowerment, and the need to stand your ground and not blindly follow rules. 4/5.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Because of bad leftists' publicity?

The RSS: Roadmaps 21st Century
Sunil Ambekar

Imagine a time 20 years ago. We were all fed with a single narrative. The government-controlled media or media barons churned out cable news will tell us 'the truth'. There was no counter-narrative to argue this. The world accepted this one version. The fringe publishment that aired an alternative perspective of the event is labelled a rabble-rouser and scorned. Now with the availability of all the information at our disposal, we are still unsure of many things. For every piece of news churned, there is an immediate contradictory explanation just to shoot it down at its inception, making us none the wiser.

I have always been given the impression that RSS is terrible news. My brother-in-law, who spent much of his formative years in India, and his wife, an Indian citizen who gave up her citizenship for her newfound love and land, Malaysia, have no qualms that RSS is synonymous with bigotry and fanaticism. Any piece of news from RSS (Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh; National Volunteer Organisation) is immediately labelled propaganda and untrue. Yet another family member who has found employment in Malaysia has nothing nice to say about RSS. To him, the RSS management cherry-picked delinquents and academically weak students to do their dirty job in the name of religion.

My schoolmate, who probably had his long-lost ancestors coming from India, believes Muslims are selectively persecuted in India. He himself is a Muslim. He is convinced that RSS in India is what Mossad is to Israel, just like the symbiotic relationship between Sein Fenn and the IRA. He is cocksure that RSS is the militant wing of the BJP (like Al-Aqsa martyr Brigades and Fatah). 

But then alternative news tells me otherwise. In the aftermath of any calamity, volunteers of RSS are the first to be at the scene giving moral and humanitarian support. They are so well organised and are said to provide service without much fanfare. Being an NRI, I was naturally conflicted between what I read and what I had heard.

Dr Keshav Baliram Hedgewar

I thought this book gives a complete account of RSS' genesis, its earlier objectives, and how it evolved in a post-independent India. India was a restless country from the turn of the 19th century to the 20th. The rebel yell was heard from all four corners of Bharat. Every third person that one saw was a freedom fighter. Events like the Partition of Bengal in 1905 and the Jallianwala Bagh massacre in 1919 further ignited the fire for self-rule.

Against this background, with the shouts of 'Vande Matram' and Lokmanya Tilak's 1906 visit to Nagpur, Maharashtra, a young Keshav Baliram Hedgewar's national interest was piqued. Thilak was labelled 'the Father of Political Unrest'. He made a political life of agitating the British for self-rule. Nagpur, at that time, was a fertile ground for nationalistic activities steeped deep into the Hindu way of life. Keshav went on to read medicine in Calcutta in 1910. Dr Keshav Hedgewar returned to Nagpur in 1915 with a medical degree and a chest full of Indian nationalism after interacting with Bengali revolutionaries. 

RSS flag

His idea of disciplining the young mind was through physical activity, traditional martial arts and wrestling. Slowly his group started participating in satyagraha movements and campaigning against social ills. Somewhere around the 1920s, the British managed to introduce the idea of the 'Muslim-Hindu unity' concept. Gandhi, with his Congress Party, parted ways with Hedgewar over Gandhi's support of the Khalifat movement. Some within the Congress Party also opposed Hedgewar's so-called militant-natured activities. RSS was formed in 1925. Its objective at inception was to influence the mind and soul of the Nation to gain independence. Not wanting to fall into the British divide-and-rule trap, the RSS decided to dig deep into the Nation's civilisation to inculcate value readily present into the subcontinent before the invaders wrecked our knowledge and infused theirs. 

After independence, the RSS continues their service to the needy. It promotes the Hindu way of life, fights for social and caste justice, and tries to improve modern familial relationships. Contrary to what they are accused of, RSS is not a misogynistic organisation. They have many prominent female leaders. Even though detractors hurl abuses of religious bigotry, the RSS have many Christian, Muslim and Farsi members and leaders in their fold. 

They must be doing something right for being around for almost a century. The RSS must be relevant for drawing so many non-Hindu members into their fold. Something to ponder.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Toxic miscarriage of justice?

Roe v Wade (2021)

This movie is often described as the worst film made in 2021 so far. It must surely be a showcase for lousy storytelling, novice acting, and horrible script all put together. Sometimes, we wonder which direction the movie is going, pro-life or pro-choice? 

This offering is made by the people who feel the country was hoodwinked by Planned Parenthood in believing that the decision to give women the right over the reproductive function was what the government wanted. The Planned Parenthood's link to Margaret Singer and her work in eugenics and the 'Negro project' (and even Klu Klax Klan as the film suggest) meant that the foundation's intentions are subversive. It is said to have enticed medical practitioners and social workers with fake statistics and media to influence public sentiments. The prime advocate of abortion on demand was a gynaecologist Bernard Nathanson, who allegedly changed the whole pro-abortion issue into a money-making endeavour, later apparently repented and started championing an anti-abortion stance.

The film, however, gives a good background of the events surrounding the Supreme Court and the thinking of the 1973 landmark case. A Texan lady, Norma McCorvey, referred to as Jane Roe in her trials to maintain anonymity, was advised to put up an injunction, through her lawyers, to terminate her pregnancy. Norma had a troubled childhood and had had frequent run-ins with the law, even at the age of ten. Married at 16, only to discover that her partner was left with a baby and a drinking problem, her mother adopted her baby. A second partner came around, and a second baby ensued but was given up for adoption. She had her third unplanned pregnancy when she was 21 in 1969. She allegedly made a false claim that she was raped by a black man to demand a termination as it seems it was permissible by Texan law. She lost on paperwork, but the lawyers decided to get the case heard in the US Supreme Court with the backing of Planned Parenthood.

The times were changing. The social fabric and the place of women were evolving. From a position of playing second fiddle to men, the two world wars had shown that the women's role in society was equally as important as that of men. Hence, it became logical to demand equal rights, and they viewed reproduction as something that held them back from exploring their full potentials. The thinking was that 'one who controls reproduction controls her future. 

With this background and the change of the Supreme Court judges (after Nixon's appointment), the law was passed. 

Interestingly, both Dr Nathanson and Norma McCovey later became devout Catholics and fought for anti-abortion lobbyists.

Week 3: Embryonic stage

By no means, the question of abortion on demand has been resolved by the Roe v Wade case. (Wade is the name of the Public Prosecutor assigned to McCorvey's case). Legal minds still argue about Roe v Wade. It brings on the question of patient privacy and the place of the unborn child as a living entity demanding rights itself.

Scholars have been debating when life actually starts for centuries and still not come to a definite conclusion. For example, is it at Day 14 of conception when differentiation to trigeminal layers occurs? Or is it at the commencement of heartbeat or fetal movements?

All these academic stuff are well and fine to determine the path for the human race to follow, but in reality, in the ground, the public Joe has to handle the day-to-day dealing with more mouths to feed than they actually can. The funny thing about nature is that the people who can ill afford to have children are bestowed (or cursed) with generous gifts from the Stork. So poverty and multiparity are directly linked. How about rape as a justification to terminate a pregnancy? Are we going to lose the next Steve Jobs or Albert Einstein here?

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.