Love, Unconditionally

I love you unconditionally to let do what you want,
and be who you really are.

I don’t need you to change your opinions,
just so I can love you more. Remember, I love you unconditionally.

I would never change you, just so I can feel better.
My well-being is my responsibility, not yours. 

I love you unconditionally, enough so I don’t have to
change my behaviour just to make you happy,
for I know you are capable of doing it on your own.

I love you unconditionally, even if it means letting you go.

You are my desire, not my need. It is unconditional love. 

Corridor of Atheism

atheism /'eɪθɪɪz(ə)m/ n. Disbelief in, or denial of, the existence of God or gods.

One of the biggest myths in the world is atheism. Disbelief in God also implies lack of religious belief. Logically one cannot be an atheist and religious at the same time. Anyone who doesn’t believe in God or doesn’t abide by organised religion or a religious cult claims to be an atheist. But is anyone really an atheist? The idea of atheism is restricted to the dogmas of religions and cults. But regardless of one’s religious beliefs, most people do believe in something. It could be God, an object, a profession, a political orientation, politician, “serious” or dark cinema, a sports team, an animal or a human being — practically anything connected to or independent of organised religion.

Most highbrow film buffs (the Hollywood types, the Yuppies, Anurag Kashyap’s aficionados) claim to be atheists, but they have a resolute devotion towards their type of cinema. How could such people be called atheists?

Religious people are accused of never questioning their religion, yet one would never see a highbrow move buff criticise movies like Gangs Of Wasseypur or Neerja. Blind faith isn’t restricted to organised religions. So-called atheists are equally obedient towards their objects of zeal. Most religious people are not fanatical about their beliefs but most highbrow movie buffs are fanatical towards their cinema or television show. Still, fanaticism is only correlated to religion. When sports fans turn riotous, it’s called mental disintegration of over-exuberant fans; but when religious fanatics turn riotous, religion gets a bad name.

Muslims respect other religions even though they consider Islam as the only true religion. They never mock other religions. They don’t stop non-Muslims from observing their respective religions. They don’t spread hate against other religions or atheists. That’s true democracy. That what being liberal means — watching a yuppie TV show doesn’t make you liberal. Now compare that to the so-called atheists, highbrow movie buffs. They ridicule mainstream cinema. They spread hate against people whose cinematic predilections don’t match theirs. They bully those who don’t subscribe to their cinematic diktats. They manipulate ratings on IMDB through fake mass-voting. Yet they are championed as the most broad-minded people in the world.

People misuse religion to control others. But it’s not just religion that gets distorted by control freaks — radicalisation of anything is dangerous. Hinduism is a tolerant, secular, polytheistic religion. Some of the greatest mathematicians and scientists in the world have been Hindus. The very foundation of human rights was set by Christianity. One of Islam’s main purpose was to eliminate racism and class divisions. Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) taught Muslims to be kind to non-Muslims. The main purpose of Sikhism was to eliminate segregation of society on the basis of caste, colour, creed, social status etc. Sikh gurudwaras (temples) serve langar (free meals) to people irrespective of their faith and social status. (On the other hand, people like Karan Johar have only intensified class divisions in India.) What have the radicalised fans of Adolf Hitler, Karan Johar, Tanmay Bhat and Russell Peters done for the world other than spreading hate and xenophobia?

The religious concepts of salvation, heaven and hell are mocked by so-called atheists. Ironically, the atheist movie buffs indirectly promote the same ideology without using the same words. When they castigate people for not watching a certain Anurag Kashyap film, aren’t they implying that such people will rot in hell? (Otherwise what difference will not watching a movie make? It’s just a darn movie after all!) Religious people claim to be better connected to God than non-believers. Similarly, serious movie buffs claim to be better than people who watch cinema for entertainment. They just don’t use the idea of God but in essence they are saying the same thing. Some religious bigots claim that a strict adherence to their religion will get them numerous virgins in heaven. Similarly, serious movie buffs claim that watching so-called highbrow cinema will get them laid on the earth. The only difference is that the movie buffs keep things real, but the trap is the same — making people think that they they will get special benefits over others who aren’t like them.

Most dictators in the world have been atheists. It’s true that terrorists have no religion — some of them are atheists.  

Make Them Think They Are Thinking

“If you make people think they are thinking, they’ll love you; but if you really make them think, they’ll hate you.” — Don Marquis.

This is what separates a film like Gulaal from No Smoking. Both were made by India’s beloved, Anurag Kashyap, but both drew opposite reactions. Gulaal became the darling of the ruling elite because of its austere, dark narrative; whereas, No Smoking became the most notorious movie ever because of its abstruse story, unconventional narrative and overall weirdness. One made people think that they were thinking, while the other actually made an effort to make them think. After the disastrous response to No Smoking, Anurag Kashyap grasped the ruling elite’s fostered dogmas and moved his career in the direction of Gulaal. 

The serious directors in India are called unconventional. But no one ever realises that they just mirror what so-called mainstream directors do. Mainstream directors make films that appeal to the masses, while the serious directors focus on critics. They are just two sides of the same coin. Both follow certain formulas. Both seek approval of their respective audience. Both can be very insecure. Yet the serious bores get all the accolade. If mainstream action films are formulaic, then so are gangster films. If mainstream directors cannot make supposedly award-worthy films, then the “serious” directors cannot make blockbusters. It’s easy to ridicule a blockbuster but hard to make one. Anurag Kashyap fell flat on his face when he attempted a mainstream film with Bombay Velvet.

Who decides that critics are superior to common people? What makes a film critic an authority on cinema? Critics don’t even need any qualification, unlike other professionals. In India anyone who cannot do anything in life can become a film critic. Kamaal Rashid Khan’s resounding success as a film connoisseur is a proof. So, who decides that Kamaal Rashid Khan or his cronies have the authority to influence the kind of movies that should be made? Critics cry for more freedom, yet they cannot take any criticism from public. The very idea of film critic’s influence is dictatorial.

No one ever wonders that a biopic or a film based on real events, has a ready-made story. (Of course cinema isn’t all about story. It’s the treatment of a story that matters.) But thinking up a piece of fiction requires more creative effort. An austere biopic on Gandhi is admirable but comedy like Lage Raho Munnabhai entails far more creativity. Films like Back To The Future, Memento, and Inception are works of pure genius.

In India any movie that’s has a serious subject and is “realistic” and easy to comprehend, gets pigeonholed as good cinema. Everyone follows this sentiment robotically. It has become a dogma. Like religious beliefs, nobody dares to question it. Anyone who dares to do so is insulted. Here are some of the dogmatic diktats: biopics are intelligent because they are real and anything unconventional or that makes you feel good is lowbrow rubbish. No Smoking makes you stupid, while Gangs of Wasseypur can make you smarter than Einstein. If you don’t like Airlift and Neerja you are not only anti-national but also stupid. You could be doing a PhD, yet it’s Gangs of Wasseypur that determines your intelligence quotient.

India has another ridiculous notion: any movie that’s realistic or serious is artistic. Alfred Hitchcock mostly made suspense thrillers; they were not only very entertaining but more artistic than the oeuvres of modern-day ascetic bores. Luis Buñuel and David Lynch — the legends of surreal cinema — made great films but none of them would get any respect in India because most of the self-proclaimed intellectuals don’t understand surrealism. Hence, it’s rubbish. The films of Luis Buñuel and David Lynch challenging and require more thinking than a straight-laced austere film.

The irony of Anurag Kashyap’s cinema (or any branch of serious cinema) is that it preaches shades-of-grey mindset (acceptance of human flaws, realism, lack of idealism etc.), yet its supporters expect idealism and obedience from film viewers by expecting them to only watch “serious” cinema. They want free thinking, but they are ones who curb free thinking by restricting cinema to their blinkered, austere vision. Diversity is beautiful. Films like Psycho, 2001: A Space Odyssey, The Sixth Sense, Memento, The Prestige, The Godfather, Back To The Future, 8 and 1/2 are great films and all of them are different from one another. It’s the beauty of diversity that makes cinema so rich. But diversity is considered an enemy because of political and cinematic propagandas.

The Don Marquis’ quote at the start of this post best describes the strategy of politicians and film snobs to control people. Anyone who doesn’t like mainstream cinema is called a non-conformist, even though they don’t have the guts to criticise or even question any serious film (what an irony!). People who like feel-good cinema do it on their own volition; they have the freedom to like or dislike any feel-good film. So who’s more open-minded and obedient? Anyone who likes Anurag Kashyap is touted as a liberal, even though they abuse those who are not into such cinema. So, who’s more liberal? How can not liking Neerja make one unpatriotic or irresponsible or stupid? Neerja was a great lady whose story deserved to be shown. But not showing interest or not liking that movie doesn’t mean disrespect towards her. Anyone who wants to know about her can read about her. It’s a matter of personal choice. Having an opinion on a movie is a personal choice, not a criteria for determining one’s purpose in life. Politicians and “serious” filmmakers shame movies that are made for money (as if they would ever quit their high-paying jobs). An Indian politician literally beats up an Air India employee for giving him an economy class ticket, but he expects common people to watch “sensible” films and American TV shows. Karan Johar emotionally blackmails people who prefer feel-good cinema, while boasting about his riches. In 2010 he made a statement against Islamophobia in My Name Is Khan. In 2017 he used anti-Muslim sentiment to promote Bahubali. Anurag Kashyap’s rabid fans (are there any other kind?) chastise those who don’t watch serious cinema, whilst enjoying a game of cricket with beer.

Most people cannot see this hypocrisy, because of the indoctrination and emotional blackmail that they are put through. They are lied to by the establishment. They throw flattering adjectives at them like “hipsters”, “yuppies”, “non-conformists”, “rebels”, “street smart liberals”, “cool motherfuckers” etc. They are told that they know everything but in truth they don’t. And they don’t even know that they don’t.

Rise of The Movie Mafia

“Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.” — Lord Acton.

The rise of Youtube yuppies like TVF Pitchers and All India Bakchod is gradually becoming a menace in India. If the escalation in class divisions, bigotry and hate — because of them — wasn’t enough now there are multiple charges of sexual harassment against Arunabh Kumar, the head of TVF Pitchers. It is alarming that numerous women have come out and spoken against him. [1]

TVF and AIB are a movie mafia supported by the ruling yuppies and their mindless disciples. Bash mainstream Hindi cinema (so-called Bollywood) and you are set for life in India. These bastards think that they can get away with anything because of that. Unfortunately, they are right. They understand the psyche of gullible Indian yuppies. But it’s not just the yuppie crowd that cowers to them. Indian media and politicians are desperately defending them, slandering the women who dared to speak against him. The victims of rapes and sexual harassment already face so much discrimination in India. It’s such a shame that these yuppies who claim to champion female empowerment (by watching Karan Johar’s movies) are so dismissive of the numerous charges against the TVF’s pervert — just because he likes so-called highbrow movies. It’s so easy to manipulate the sheep-minded yuppies. Arnuabh Kumar and cronies make a video on the Indian Army, click selfies with them, denigrate Aamir Khan, suck up to Shobhaa De and Anurag Kashyap, give thumps up to a patriotic movie — and they are declared as modern icons of India. It is that easy to appease them.

Liberalism is a myth in India. Most of the people in India think that being liberal means watching Anurag Kashyap’s movies, American TV shows and bashing the Right-wing Hindus and Muslims. Arunabh Kumar is to them what Donald Trump is to Klu Klux Klan. Strangely, even the Right-wing Hindus are fearful of TVF and cronies. His sheep-minded fans lack reasoning skills or the ability to think for themselves. If they cannot come up with a justification, they resort to abuse. They make fun of Godmena and bhakts but ironically they are worse than them. TVF and AIB have an information technology cell that harasses people who criticise them. In India it’s to criticise Narendra Modi but not many people have the guts to criticise the likes of TVF and AIB. The dangers of film fanaticism are real.

Two men chant “allah-u-akbar” before shooting down a crowd, they are quickly labelled as terrorists and Islam comes under scrutiny. But when a fan of Dark Knight goes on a killing spree at a cinema, the “terrorist” word isn’t used, nor does Hollywood come under any scrutiny. Why do movie buffs get away with things that theists don’t? The men who chanted “allah-u-akbar” probably had nothing to do with Islam. Islam condemns killing of any human. Whereas, it was well-known that the Dark Knight fan was fanatical about Hollywood movies. It doesn’t even matter what religion that Dark Knight was fan was of — he could be Christian, Muslim or an atheist. His fanaticism for highbrow cinema saved him from criticism.

There will be less intolerance in the world for at least a few days, as IMDB has shut down its message boards. It’s great move because IMBD was becoming a hub of radicalised movie buffs. The amount of brainwashing going on there would have put Nazis to shame. Some people have called it a death of “meaningful discourses on cinema” but obviously those Fascists have no clue about what meaningful discourses on cinema are. Obviously those Philistines have never read a book in their lives and they think that watching some idiot’s Youtube channel makes them an intellectual. If anything, the shutting down of message boards has hopefully saved a few lives.

Karan Johar and Anurag Kashyap — the darlings of India — shamelessly support these channels. TVF and AIB aren’t just Youtube channels or film fanatics, they are death cults. They revel in depression, bigotry and destruction. To them life begins after death. If these people take over, India can become the next Iran or North Korea. A few years ago, when a the Godman Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh Insaan (The MSG wonder) was accused of rapes, his disciples turned riotous. Anurabh Kumar’s yuppie breed is likely to take the same route in future. He and his cronies are the Godmen of Yuppies.

Source: [1] TheQuint

Politics of Guilt

Social activism is easy these days. All you have to do is watch serious cinema or dark cinema. That’s all you have to do — just be a couch potato who watches “good” films and you will become an intellectual. Movie buffs have become like that character in the 1980s’ Twilight Zone series (“The Curious Case of Edgar Witherspoon”) who has to keep running an extremely complex contraption to keep the earth spinning smoothly in its orbit. Movie fanatics do the same by watching “serious” movies to save the world from moral degradation and endemics.

Cinema was a medium of art and entertainment but now it is a medium of propaganda and guilt politics. Misplaced austerity has replaced art and propaganda (guilt politics) has replaced entertainment. Filmmakers like Anurag Kashyap and his crony Youtube channels use guilt politics to sell their movies. They guilt-trip or even intimidate people who prefer feel-good cinema. They have turned optimism and happiness into pure guilt. Now the darker a film is, the better it is considered than a feel-good movie; the sadder the ending, the more stars it gets from critics. Every time people prefer larger-than-life entertainment, they are reminded of the dark realities of “real” world and held responsible for everything wrong with the society. Those who watch dark movies are considered intellectually superior to those who prefer entertainment. This is pure politics of guilt to manipulate people. Why is only entertainment in cinema singled out? If entertainment is evil, then should’t all forms of entertainment be banned? Shouldn’t people be guilt-tripped for watching cricket or football? If escapist cinema is a sin, then they should also stop partying and drinking alcohol. It is another thing that these arbitrary bastards will die if they cannot go to a disco every Saturday night. For education there are books. Reading expands one’s horizons and broadens one’s vocabulary. But of course, these Philistine bastards have probably never read a book in their lives and their rickety attention spans cannot handle anything more than a few tweets.

Whenever they run out of excuses, they use the soldier analogy to attack whoever isn’t on the same page: “Our soldiers make sacrifices for us. Can’t you watch dark movies?” The entire argument ends whenever they use the solider analogy. So, enduring dark or austere cinema is similar to serving in the army.

Anurag Kashyap is a like the government school teachers of India — sour, dour, austere and grumpy. They inculcate them with their dour values: thou shall not laugh, thou shall not be happy, thou shall study for eighteen hours a day, though shall not wear a perfume, thou shall not party etc. They deflate others so they can feel better about their own frustrations. These scrooges make happiness look like a sin.

I have nothing against austere cinema or tragic endings. I admire the Shakespearean tragedies of Vishal Bharadwaj. I likes movies of Dibakar Banarjee, Govind Nihlani and older movies of Anurag Kashyap. But why should cinema only be restricted to certain sensibilities? There is nothing wrong with sad endings. But the trouble brews when such people are considered smarter than others, simply on their preference of depression over happiness. The question is, what do viewers of dark cinema or serious cinema contribute to society by watching such movies? Watching movies, whether comedies or tragedies, doesn’t make any difference. It is as constructive an activity as watching a game of cricket. No one becomes a great thinker or a great patriot by watching Gangs of Wasseypur or by bullying those don’t like it.

Alfred Hitchcock made entertaining films. His weren’t feel-good films: they were dark but very thrilling, suspenseful and entertaining at the same time. His cinema was a work of art with great usage of expressionism, symbolisms and so forth. Each scene in his each film had more art than the entire oeuvres of these ascetic bores. In India, however, art cinema is considered a movie with realism and austerity. The parameters are blinkered like the outlook of the ascetic manipulators. Where are enterprising filmmakers like Hitchcock, Fellini, Bunuel etc.?

Cinema is creating more divisions in society than caste or colour. What does watching dark movies do? Does it book you a spot in heaven? Will Salman Khan’s fans go to hell? Does it guarantee lifelong riches? Does it get one a seat in the best universities in the world? Does the cure of cancer lie in those movies? Does it resolve the Kashmir issue?

Radicalised movie buffs keep lying to their disciples. Watching serious cinema doesn’t make one a social activist. Those who want to make a difference, actually go out and do something meaningful like my cousin H’Ji.

O’ movie buff, cut your ego, not movies.
Learn to think for yourself, instead of blindly following reviewers.
Stop policing people’s taste in cinema.
Don’t make cinema your religion.
Let your daughters fall in love. 

François Truffaut said, “Film lovers are sick people.” Who would have thought the hyperbole would become a reality one day? Earlier people reviewed movies, now movies review people.

Dawood Ibrahim’s Progeny

Dawood Ibrahim is gone from India but he left his progeny behind in the form of All India Bakchod and TVF Pitchers. If he were born a few decades later, he could have easily been a part of India’s over-felicitated start-up breed. It would have been easy for him to legitimise his mafia business under the subterfuge of the start-up culture of Youtube yuppies. He would be invited to give leadership lectures to students in IITs, IIMs and other universities; he would appear on Indian version of Ted Talks to disperse his nuggets of gyan; on Quora.com he would be a lifestyle guru advising fellow yuppies on almost everything from parenting to quantum physics; he would be invited on Karan Johar’ Koffee With Karan and talk about his best kills and if Al Capone was hotter than Ted Bundy. All he would have to do is to start a Youtube channel like AIB and TVF, purport to be an admirer of highbrow cinema and American TV shows — thence he would become a darling of India’s yuppies. There isn’t much difference between Dawood Ibrahim and the likes of All India Bakchod, except that the latter are backed by politicians and intellectuals. Both use fear and intimidation to control others. Both are self-righteous and autocratic custodians of society. Both are loved by Fascists.

TVF Pitchers are a hipster version of Khap Panchayat. They decide what’s original and what’s not. When Aurag Kashyap gets inspired by Cat’s Eye, it’s called an inspiration but if others get inspired or even pay a homage, they are slandered as plagiarists. In one of their propaganda videos, they have asserted that Shankar-Jaikishen’s song from Janwar, “Deko ab to kisko nahi hai khabar” is copied from The Beatles song (“I want to hold your hand”). Obviously those malicious, boorish, autocratic bastards don’t a know a thing about history. The Beatles visited India in 1960 and were deeply inspired by the spirituality; they became friends with Shankar-Jaikishen and Shami Kapoor. In return Shankar-Jaikishen decided to pay a homage to them through that song. It was an obvious tribute. They four men playing guitars were clearly dressed as The Beatles, making no effort to hide the similarities. There is a demarcation between plagiarism and homage. (There have been several songs that were plagiarised by other Indian composers in the ‘80s and the ‘90s, but this was clearly not. Shankar-Jaikishen and other composers of that era were of a different league altogether. Heck, even The Beatles loved it but India’s cinema police won’t accept it.) They tell people what movies to watch and now they also police people’s taste in music. What’s next: will they tell people how many children they should have? (“Every Anurag Kashyap fan should have at least five children so we can take over” would be indoctrinated to their gullible disciples.) 

An obvious tribute to The Beatles. But Dawood Ibrahim’s successors, TVF Pitchers, refuse to accept that. 

But obviously the likes of TVF Pitchers are averse to any reasoning or logic (unless it’s meant to flatter them). Why would they make such egregious assertions? They want control like mafia. They are the modern-day versions of rogues like Dawood Ibrahim. They consider themselves as the trend influencers, just like Shobhaa De, Karan Johar, AIB etc. This is the reason why AIB’s dictator Tanmay Bhat slandered Lata Mangeshkar in his propaganda video. They use fear and coercion to control everyone.

All Dawood Ibrahim has to do is to announce that he loves Breaking Bad. His image would change and he might even get a pardon from the brain-dead yuppies of Indian government. 

Ae Dil Hai Nationalist

Atul Mehndi, the teddy-bear lookalike, took a pledge, with his hand over his chest, to never watch any Indian movie featuring Pakistani artistes after the attack on the Indian army in Uri. Karan Johar’s Ae Dil Hai Mushkil became highly contentious before its release since it featured Pakistani actor Fawad Khan. Atul Mehndi and his nationalist ilk criticised Johar and urged everyone to boycott the movie, lest they would be anti-national.

Karan Johar appeared in a video, double-chinned, gaunt and sombre, dark circles under his eyes — a perfect image for his morbid audience. He cried like a sissy, pleading his love for India. He implored the detractors, like a prayerful beggar on a train, to allow the release of his movie and promised to never work with any Pakistani in future.

Once the movie released, fawning reviews started flowing. As soon as it became apparent that Karan Johar had relinquished happy endings forever and that he had traded entertainment for darker issues surrounding the “first world”, he become a national hero. Atul Mehndi and his ilk not only watched the movie but extolled it with sheer sycophancy. All it takes is a sad ending to become a nationalist these days.

I won’t be surprised if it was another publicity gimmick to promote his movie. If people wanted to boycott movies with Pakistani connection, then why Raees came out two months later without any objection despite having Mahira Khan? (Interestingly, Mahira Khan had a significant role in Raees compared to Fawad Khan’s cameo in Ae Dil Hai Mushkil.)

Karan Johar has become a darling of the liberals just because he expressed his loathe for happy endings. He often talks about his depression that inspired him to make Ae Dil Hai Mushkil. He is cunning opportunist. He looks down on happy endings (because his own life is glum), yet he says that he cannot travel in economy class. Just see his contradiction. In an interview to a sycophant film critic, he said that he once travelled in economy class when he was a nobody (in the days of Dilwale Dulhania Le Jayenge) and it was “very uncomfortable” for him even then. These “serious” filmmakers pontificate on the virtues of “sensible” cinema, depression and sad endings, yet they can never leave the comforts of business class. His idiotic fans justify him by saying that even though he cannot give up comfort, he compensates for it by making movies on the “first-world problems”; so that gives him the privilege to lead a lavish lifestyle as long as he leads a sad life. What a sick explanation by his equally sick, rabid fans!

By no means do I mean that he or anyone should give up affluence. It’s just the hypocrisy of these stupid movie buffs that’s laughable. If a lowbrow filmmaker had talked about his or her love for riches, people would have castigated that person for being thankless, as if the cure of cancer lies in the movies of Karan Johar and Anurag Kashyap.

He bribed the self-proclaimed film critic Kamaal R. Khan to trash the rival film, Ajay Devgan’s Shivaay, which was releasing on the same day. Ajay Devgan even wrote about it on twitter.

Hear what self proclaimed no. 1 critic and trade analyst Kamaal R Khan has to say. https://t.co/wRc7moSlsZ

— Ajay Devgn (@ajaydevgn) 1 September 2016

People are judged by the company they keep. How can anyone who considers Kamaal R. Khan a film critic be called an intellectual? Johar has nexus with Fascists like AIB and TVF and harangues people about free speech, when in truth they are the most intolerant people in India. They police people’s taste in cinema, music etc. and get hostile when anyone criticises them. When Mohammed Rafi’s fans peacefully protested on the derogatory remarks about Rafi in the movie, yuppies chastised them. If a mainstream movie criticised an American TV show like Breaking Bad or any Hollywood legend, would these yuppies stay quiet? At least Rafi’s fans are peaceful. Aamir Khan once mildly criticised AIB Roast and the liberals nearly destroyed his career.

The brain-dead yuppies say that directors like Anurag Kashyap and the born-again auteur Karan Johar should stop making movies in India because Indian audience aren’t worthy of them. Since the neo-Nazis love Hollywood and Iraninan cinema, the duo should make movies in US and Iran. Karan Johar says that he can get arrested in India if he reveals his sexual orientation. So, one of the most powerful men of India claims that he can get arrested if he tells anyone that he’s gay. The man who hangs out with powerful people like Shobhaa De, Anurag Kashyap, Tanmay Bhat etc. fears prosecution because of his sexuality. It’s as preposterous as the politics of guilt he plays to get critical acclaim. Perhaps Karan Johar and Anurag Kashyap should make movies in Iran for a more deserving audience and enjoy the “tolerance” of Iran’s autocratic theocracy. Homosexuality is punishable by death there. I am not suggesting that they should relocate to Iran but merely replying to their hostile supporters who claim that India isn’t worthy of them.

A movie buff can go any length to get critical acclaim. The pledge taken by Atul Mehndi and others was just empty twaddle — much like the “sensible” values of Karan Johar. When depression becomes a virtue and bliss becomes a sin, Kamaal Rashid Khan’s idiocy is here to stay. 

Only In India

There’s a supposedly satirical list circulated on social networks by certain self-appointed custodians of our society. One message in the long list reads, “In India worst films make the most money.”

The list should be improvised with the following:

1. We measure a person’s success by the money they make, but run down movies that are blockbusters.
2. In India, 0.001% of the people—the elite—decide what movies should rest of the people like. They decide what’s good and what’s “worst”.
3. In India bashing mainstream film makes one an intellectual, but criticising the ruling political party makes one anti-national.
4. Hardworking labourers and farmers have a low social status, while couch potatoes who watch Anurag Kashyap’s movies and AIB’s videos are among the most respectable people in the country.
5. People are not judged by their skills and actions, but by their caste and taste in cinema. 
6. You have absolute freedom of speech as long as you agree to the views of AIB or the ruling elite. 
7. A “bad” movie becomes an object of national outrage but a heinous honour killing doesn’t.

Film connoisseurship is taken too seriously in India since the advent of film cults. If highbrow cinema were that important, shouldn’t USA be the most loved country in the world? Eighty-nine percent of Pakistanis have a poor opinion of America. The numbers have only increased after Osama Bin Laden’s assassination. Iran makes highbrow movies. If watching movies were a measure of success, shouldn’t Iran be one of the most prosperous countries in the world? Iran has terrible human rights record; there’s no freedom of speech; women are forced to cover their heads in public; dissident intellectuals are jailed; a Canadian-Iranian women spent months in prison because she was “dabbling in feminism” etc. Whereas, Canadian cinema barely creates any ripples in the universe, yet Canada is a great country that looks at its bright future with its head held high. 

Perfect Shades of Grey: Miserable Lives of Startup Arseholes

Ours is essentially a rabid era in which not only history but parameters of morality are being rewritten. There’s an article by Nishi Jain doing rounds: “We have dismissed academics and replaced Sharmaji ka beta with Mr. Malhotra’s engineer-turned-startup-guy son who plays the drums and drinks like a fish. He is the new role model every youngster has to aspire to become. We look at the perfect son of Mr. Malhotra and push ourselves further, till the threads begin to snap, layer by layer.” (Disclaimer: This is not a criticism of the article but rather of the cultural ideology.)

If drinking like a fish is a sign perfection, then what everyone is aspiring for is certainly not perfection. The “perfection” preached by the modern society should be in quotes because it is distorted and contradictory. The society tells us to be “perfect” but only as per its whims and vices. They use lame metaphors to lionise their role models: drink like a fish, smoke like a chimney, sniff [cocaine] like a dog, stoned like a hippy etc. because these “qualities” are now cool. The society asks for perfection but only selective perfection: they demand perfect careers and riches but they also demand booze, drugs and bad temper. That’s the paradox of perfect shades of grey: a confused world of deranged bigots.

Yuppies buy ultra-luxury cars just to show them off at wedding parties, and then they moan like sissies about their financial woes.

The word “startup” pops up like daisies these days. It is everywhere, constantly hammered by the yuppie brigade. Being a part of the startup breed makes one cool. Startup defines our lifestyle. Startup is for superior breed. Startup is hip. Startup is yuppie. Startup is God. Everyone is chanting “startup”,  “startup”, “startup” like a mantra. The recurrence of this lame word is a proof of the linguistic decadence of these times. Reading is called a lowbrow practice because moral gurus dictate that it’s not a “cool” hobby. Reality shows and tawdry mobile apps have replaced books. Attention deficiency is viewed as a virtue, whereas having a long attention span is seen as a sign of low IQ.

Tabloids and lifestyle gurus inculcate people to “acquire” certain “popular” hobbies in order to get laid. Hobbies are activities that people enjoy doing or are interested in but taking up a hobby just for society’s approval defeats the purpose of a hobby. Eventually the semblance becomes overwhelming and pressure takes it toll. Having fun has become a duty rather than self-fulfilment and having fun does not count unless it’s posted on social media. Then such startup assholes complain that they suffer from depression.

People wonder why they aren’t happy despite their high-paying jobs and swanky lifestyles. Perhaps no one wants to be happy because they prefer to keep All India Bakchod happy. It’s all about impressing the despot of Bakchodistan. It’s all about getting All India Bakchod’s approval, even if it means living a glum life full of lies. They paint a false picture of success so that can be a part of AIB’s caucus. They join the startup brigade because... umm everyone else of their moronic ilk is doing so. So we have government employees, schoolteachers, bank tellers claiming to be a part of the startup bandwagon.

As for Mr. Malhotra’s “perfect” son, the startup arseholes tell an incomplete story. He surely drinks like a fish but many people don’t know that after a few drinks he vomits like a pathetic loser and spends Sundays nursing his hangovers. He is a cool drummer, good at beating the drum of his superiority but he is officially bankrupt; he owes millions but still leads a lavish lifestyle. His married life is in shambles because he beats up his wife. He suffers from bipolar disorder and chronic depression. He is also a drug addict and a part-time drug supplier.

Whereas, Sharma ji’s supposedly unpopular academic son just received a Nobel Prize.

Why Most Sports Fans Are Stupid

Intellectuals are often critical of sports fans. They have a very good reason. Most of the sports fans are bigoted, fanatical, stupid and extremely jingoistic. Let it be fans of cricket, football or pro-wrestling, they all are the same. Of course not all sports fans are stupid. There are many rational, intelligent sports lovers. My cousin, Bundy, is a big fan of football and has very good knowledge of cricket. But unfortunately such people are a minority. Here are some outrageously asinine remarks or acts of some cricket fanatics:

—“Pakistani bowlers are considered to be legends, yet none of them feature in the list of top-ten highest wicket takers in Test cricket. [Followed by a laugh.]”

This is such a stupid argument. Judging a cricketer on statistics alone is ridiculous. Statistics don’t reveal the quality of the bowling, conditions and many other factors like injuries. Every great batsman who faced Malcolm Marshall considers him the greatest fast bowler ever but he doesn’t doesn’t even feature in the list top fifteen wicket takers. In fact, apart from Courtney Walsh, none of the great West Indian fast bowlers including Marshall, Curtly Ambrose, Michael Holding feature among the top ten. Does that mean they were inferior bowlers? Any batsman would agree that Marshall, Ambrose and Holding were the most difficult bowlers to face. Mashall took 376 wickets. Compared to him Muralitharan and Warne had 800 and 708 respectively. Does that mean he was only half as good as they were? Surely not.

If statistics alone were to judge greatness, then Sachin Tendulkar never scored a triple century. In fact, he doesn’t feature in the list of top-90 highest scores made in a Test innings. Does that mean he’s not the best or one of the best?

Number of wickets are also dependent on the matches played. Imran Khan played cricket for twenty years but he only played 88 Tests, simply because Pakistan didn’t play enough cricket in the 1980s.

—“Md. Hafeez has a better batting average than Ian Botham, Mike Atherton and Nasseer Hussian. Hence, he is better than them.”

Obviously, the idiot who made his claim knows little about cricket. Comparing two different eras of cricket is ridiculous. Firstly, Botham and company didn’t have the luxury of featherweight, ultra-powerful bats of today and they faced much higher quality of bowlers than Hafeez does. Moreover, most of Hafeez’s runs have come against weak bowling attacks. Hafeez has a batting average of 39, which would be equal to an average of 25 in the ‘80s and the ‘90s.

If Javed Miandad and Vivian Richards played today, they would have averaged 70. Saeed Anwar was a great opener. Statistically his average is only six runs higher than Hafeez’s but he was a vastly superior batsman. In fact, he never scored a double century in his prolific career. But that doesn’t mean that he was an ordinary cricketer.

—“Sponsors and TV channels like Twenty-20 cricket because it draws more audience. But when it comes to films, people should only watch highbrow movies.” There is nothing wrong with this argument in isolation but the same hypocrites cry like sissies whenever Anurag Kashyap’s movie fails to float at the box-office. They abuse people who don’t see his movies. They ridicule common people for choosing entertainment over austerity. They belittle most of the blockbusters with their bigoted, inflammatory remarks. Akash Chopra shares propaganda videos that criticise blockbusters but gets offended when anyone criticises IPL. If public prefers T20 cricket over Test cricket, then they also prefer movies of Salman Khan or Akshay Kumar over the likes of Anurag Kashyap. If broadcasters want more of T20 cricket, then the same way distributors and exhibitors prefer 3 Idiots over Raman Raghav 2.0. Their double standards only reaffirm the fact that they are stupid Fascists.

With such irrational, jingoistic arguments any reasonable discussion is unexpected from such hardliners. One thing is for sure, Adolf Hitler would be proud of them. 

Manufacturing Consent on Quora

There’s trouble with unanimity. It is no doubt reliable but it shouldn’t be trusted blindly. In the 2002 elections in Iraq, there was 100 percent turnout of voters and all 100 percent voted in favour of Saddam Hussein. Obviously, the unanimity was not reliable.

Quora.com is somewhat similar to that. It is a very good tool for sharing knowledge and asking questions but only up to a certain limit. After that it is a mind control cult and a tool to manufacture consent. Take for instance the assertions used by the “happy family” of Quora:

-Most of the users of Quora claim to be employees of high-profile companies like Google, Microsoft, Apple etc. Their answers on Quora are long and anecdotal with incredible details. Where do they get time to write such long answers? People who work in those companies are well-paid but they also work long hours: sometimes 15–18 hours in a day. They not only work hard but they have families and active social lives. So where is the time to write such long answers, unless they are paid by corporations and government? In times when an average person brags about having a short attention span and gloats about having no time for anything other than work, it is quite amazing that they not only manage to post regularly on Quora, but they also find time garnish their answers with little details.

-“Quora broadens your horizons. If you don’t like Quora, you are narrow-minded and detached from reality.” The assertion itself is utterly narrow-minded and bullies anyone who dares to question them.

-Quora is like a happy family, where most of the users agree to one another. Isn’t that a little odd? It is difficulty to get unanimity in a family of four, then how could thousands of users have same opinions on almost everything from cinema to politics.

-Governments use Quora to brainwash people. The top four–five search results to most questions searched on google lead to Quora. It is a dangerous trend. Quora is influencing our actions and what we think. Quora has taken over every aspect people’s lives. Bigotry is rising. Beware.

-It is filled with thirty-odd-year-old lifestyle gurus who claim to know everything about everything. They indoctrinate people on every aspect of their lives. They tell people how many children they should have, what movies they should watch, how they can be successful (but ironically their own lives are miserable), the ideal quantity of happiness they should have in their lives (two teaspoons? in other words, no one is allowed to be happier than the prescription of lifestyle gurus), what career they should take etc. And anyone who isn’t like them or doesn’t watch the movies they watch is declared unsuccessful by them. They are a gang of bullies who harass people who ask for career advice. They discourage people from getting into high-paying careers by scaring them and feeding them with their pessimistic pabulum. If everyone listened to Quora for career advice, then many of the successful entrepreneurs, doctors and engineers would be doing minimum-wage jobs.

-Almost every Indian on Quora loves Anurag Kashyap. The ratio of his lovers on Quora to those in real world is highly skewed. You cannot even find one critic of his. Even Nardendra Modi will have more critics than Anurag Kashyap. Does that mean Anurag Kashyap is more loved than Modi? That’s ridiculous. The reason given is that Quora is only used by intelligent people and only intelligent people love Anurag Kashyap. That’s a highly preposterous claim and just another example of how Quora manufactures consent.

-There are provocative questions like “What do you think of people haven’t seen Gangs Of Wasseypur”? In other words, they mean “What should be done to people who have no interest in Gangs of Wasseypur?” It’s a well-made film but not everyone has interest in films like these. Not everyone has to watch it to fulfil their lives. Watching highbrow cinema doesn’t get one admission to Mensa. Religious fanatics share this parochial outlook with them. They too think that their religion is the best and anyone who doesn’t follow their religion is a loser. Strangely, the religious fanatics are ridiculed for such bigotry but the movie buffs are hailed as the champions of democracy.

-Quora is professed as a saviour of humanity. But what Quora has done is nothing new. Yahoo Answers did the same thing for years (it still does) but people shunned it by saying that they didn’t have time for such online activities.

-Another autocratic claim made at Quora, which I wrote about in my previous post, is that All India Bakchod is extremely popular amongst India’s youth. Just like Saddam Hussein’s “victory” with one hundred percent votes, it’s preposterous. When more than ninety-nine percent of India’s youth would not have even heard of AIB, this only speaks of their bigotry; their utter disregard for the common young people is a reflection of the class divisions flaring up in India.

-Most of the Quora users love BJP. The reason given is that most of the sensible Quora users are intelligent and educated. Hence, they love BJP. It implies, that everyone who loves BJP is smart and intelligent.

-There is a typical question that the happy family of Quora likes to ask “What advice would you give to your children or so-and-so?” Among the typically lame answers, one is “I will ask them to sign up for Quora”. Again, it’s an obviously sycophantic reply to manufacture consent.

-It is filled with racist questions and answers. The sole purpose of flashing those questions is to spread hate and bigotry.

There is no doubt that Quora is a good tool for sharing information but the cultization of Quora is extremely dangerous. Like religion, it is getting misused. It’s all about manufacturing consent by government and media to control people. Unless Quora learns to respect common people, the day is not far when it will turn into a hub of extremists. 

Manufacturing Consent with AIB

“The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum — even encourage the more critical and dissident views. That gives people the sense that there’s free thinking going on, while all the time the presuppositions of the system are being reinforced by the limits put on the range of the debate.” — Noam Chomsky.

This could very well describe the modus operandi of All India Bakchod. They like us to think that they have challenged the fundamentals of free speech. They assert that they are continuously stretching the spectrum of democracy. Media is even comparing Tanmay Bhat to the likes Baba Ambedkar and Nelson Mandela. In reality, All India Bakchod’s spectrum of acceptable opinion is extremely limited. Try criticising them. Try criticising their favourite movies. Try liking the movies they don’t like. You will find out that they are as “tolerant” as Hitler.

They, along with their political sycophants, have an Information Technology department that bullies people who speak out against them. When an actor criticised their road show, they harassed the online trading company he was endorsing by making thousands of purchases and then returning everything. Moreover, they inundated review websites with negative reviews against that company. The company’s stocks plummeted subsequently. Imagine what they do to small businesses and common people. They have thousands of IP addresses at their helm, which allows them to create fake profiles on IMDB to manipulate movie ratings. It is no coincidence that their favourite movies are rated highly and the movies of their enemies get flooded with low scores. IMDB is the best way to manufacture consent from public and they know how to exploit it to their advantage. They create fake profiles on Twitter and other social networking websites. Tanmay Bhat has millions of followers on Twitter, which is strange since he isn’t that well-known. His account has had Twitter’s verification tick-mark for a long time, when even India’s legendary cricketer like Bishan Singh Bedi’s account is still not verified. Does he have links with Dawood Ibrahim or does he have dark secrets of someone really important — (a kinky video of Kamaal R. Khan with some stupid politician)?

All India Bakchod has dictatorial views on what movies we should see and how many children should we have. They tell us what to feel, what to laugh at, what to think and how to think. They practically control every aspect of our lives. They are billed as great intellectuals. But in truth they are narrow-minded idiots. 

Their links with political parties are becoming more and more apparent on Quora.com. Many users there who support BJP and also devotees of All India Bakchod and their crony channels like VFV or TVF. They use subtle indoctrination to manufacture consent. If anyone asks why most of the Indian users on Quora.com support BJP, the responses are as follows:

-Quora users are only intelligent and educated people, hence they love BJP.

-Which implies, only intelligent and educated people support BJP. If you don’t support BJP, you are stupid. 

-Since most of the users support AIB, the implication is that only smart people like AIB.

AIB proclaims to be the voice of India’s youth when more than 99 percent of the youth would not have even heard of their name. This is an extremely effective ploy to get youth vote, since the implication is that if you are young and you don’t support AIB, you are not a part of the cool crowd.

The class divisions have only sharpened since All India Bakchod’s rise in India. If in the past, there were divisions on the basis of religion or caste, now there are divisions in cinema too. The supposed fans of highbrow cinema have a high social status. Getting a government job is not difficult as long as you like Breaking Bad. 

In the past it didn’t matter what they said but now it does. Gone are the days when they were just a bunch of hostile comedians. Now they have branches in cinema, corporations, information technology, media and politics. It is time that Mr. Narendra Modi should clarify as to who is running the country: BJP, Mohan Bhagwat or — heavens save save us —  Tanmay Bhat? Forbes has ranked Narendra Modi as the eighth most powerful man in the world. Tanmay Bhat must be on number seven.

Tanmay Bhat is a sick movie buff who likes controlling what people should watch. There was North Korean dictator, Kim Jong-il, who was also a highbrow movie buff and who liked policing people’s taste in cinema, like Tanmay Bhat. Kim Jong-il arrested people who didn’t have a “good” taste in cinema. He gassed those who watched cinema for entertainment. He abducted a North Korean director and actor to make critically-acclaimed films. Looking at modern Fascists like Karan Johar and Kamaal Rashid Khan, the same patterns are ominous.

India Under AIB

Free speech is a two-way street. If you don’t respect the freedom of speech of your dissenters, then you don’t believe in freedom of speech. All India Bakchod (AIB) expects everyone to respect their freedom of speech but they get in a moral outrage whenever anyone disagrees to their views. However, anyone who is calling for the arrest of AIB’s honcho Tanmay Bhat after his gormless video on Lata Mangeshkar is giving him exactly what he wants — sympathy vote. Asking for legal action against such idiotic videos is ridiculous. If the critics want to take him down, they should do it with the most powerful weapon of modern era — criticism. Kill the Fascist bastard with criticism. Slaughter his sick ego by making offensive video on him. Bully him into chronic depression. Slut shame him by uploading his lewd three-some video (with Karan Johar and Kamaal Rashid Khan) online. Make him commit suicide. If nothing works, settle scores in a good old-fashioned fight: crack the fat bastard’s skull in a boxing ring. By crying for his arrest, they have needlessly turned him into a hero. Or is this just another publicity stunt by his closet cronies to promote him? After all, we have seen times and again how certain sections of Indian media and corporations are trying to promote him and his Fascist group.

Tanmay Bhat has the face of a prehistoric man, an unevolved specimen of Great Apes. He is a product of bestiality or incest or a genetic experiment gone horribly wrong. The end result is a morbidly obese dictator masquerading as a clown. He makes fun of people who don’t conform to his diktats but everything is justified under the pretext of “free speech” by his naive apologists and brainless disciples. That’s fair enough. The have the right to ridicule anyone they want. But if we make fun of his obesity or his incestuous family, we are called insensitive. (What else can we expect from his hypocritical supporters?) He abuses, ridicules the elderly but they way he is bloating, he won’t even make it to thirty — a massive heart attack will take care of this burden-on-the-earth. Or if he manages to get old, he will rot in a squalid old-age home, paralysed and demented, neglected by his family, raped by some deranged employees, kicked and pissed on by teenagers and his hideous face nibbled by mice. What a pleasant sight it would be for the connoisseurs of highbrow cinema. The comedians of his ilk would find humour in his misery.

He also is a bonafide paedophile. His tweets about children are disturbing. (I have cropped his ugly picture on purpose.)

In times when people get upset so easily, his hideous remarks are conveniently ignored by intellectuals and mummy bloggers. A person like him should’t be allowed to roam near schools. It’s obvious that he is protected by someone very powerful. He and his AIB cronies prey on young children, which explains why they claim to be representatives of the “youth”. Their love for the youth is disturbing.

Has anyone noticed how most of the comedies like Sarabhai Vs Sarabhai, The Great Indian Comedy Show, The Great Indian Laughter Challenge etc. have been systemically deleted from Youtube? Has anyone noticed how even decent comedies get trashed by media? All this points to the fact that the ruling elite intends to make AIB as the face of Indian cinema and entertainment. Nobody makes good comedies anymore because humour doesn’t get any respect in this country. (Even an intelligent comedy like Matru Ki Bijlee Ka Mandola failed for the same reason.) It’s only to establish AIB’s monopoly in the entertainment industry.

AIB is one of the main reasons behind the class divisions in the society: it typifies the supremacist, imperialist, casteist, racist elite who control everyone by spreading hate and politics of guilt. They give false sense of superiority to their fans by telling them how great they are for watching highbrow movies. Their disciple Darshan Jimmykant is worthless because of such false admiration showered upon him by them. If they really cared for him they would show him the mirror, kick his servile buttocks to make him find a job instead of being a stoned couch potato. For them, watching Bombay Velvet is activism. It is ironic that these bastards wear watches worth thousands of dollars, but they have the nerve to guilt-trip people for watching feel-good cinema. They tell people to embrace austerity and shun larger-than-life movies, yet these sanctimonious pontiffs lead luxurious lives filled with expensive cars, discos and booze; they preach austerity, but they never talk in anything less than crores (ten million); they buy luxury cars just to attend weddings but watching cinema for entertainment is a sin according to these hypocrites. They police people’s taste in cinema, they present themselves as well-cultured, intellectual linguists, yet they thrive on cheap and lame words like chutiyapa and bakchod. It just shows they are boring hypocrites. They preach people to develop shades of grey in their characters since idealism is uncool according to them; they preach that nobody is good or evil but anyone who criticises AIB is declared evil by them and their bhakts. (Aren’t their critics allowed to have shades of grey? Shouldn’t there be a margin for the supposed flaws of their critics?) Their ideologies are full of such grave contradictions and inconsistencies. They have the blessings of media, corporate world, politicians and possibly the underworld. Their worthless brains are infected with leprosy. They call Kamaal Rashid Khan the top film critic and an intellectual. That idiotic assertion itself warrants butchery to death.

Whenever there are talks of peace amongst various faiths or cinematic values, whenever highbrow and lowbrow cinemas try to peacefully coexist, the demagogues like AIB intervene by spewing hateful videos, comments, fake mass-voting on IMDB to thwart peace dialogues. They incite hate through their intentionally flawed reasoning and red-herrings to distract people from the core issues. And their impressionable fans think that watching Slumdog Millionaire will reserve them a spot in heaven or Salman Khan’s films will dispatch them to hell. IMDB is a hub of such rabid fanatics. The brainwashing that goes behind the forums of IMDB would even make Nazis proud. There is a reason why feel-good films (like Shandaar, Matru Ki Bijlee Ka Mandola) from serious directors failed; they were sabotaged by such rabble-rousers who cringe at the very thought of variety and coexistence. If people had the confidence to stand by their choices, nobody would look for AIB’s approval.

Contrary to what people think, Fascism doesn’t manifest as a tentacled monstrosity with posters of Adolf Hitler and placards saying “death to infidels”. Fascism is’t humourless either. In fact, it shows up as your saviour. It reminds you of your highbrow values; it divides you in the name of religion, caste, film connoisseurship etc.; it beats up anyone or anything you feel doesn’t match your values. It doesn’t tell you that its agenda entails militia, bullying, mass imprisonments, censorship, honour killings and gas chambers. 

Character Assassinations of AIB’s Bhakts

AIB’s disciples undertake character assassination of those who disagree to their views. Therefore, I will engage in character assassinations of two AIB’s cohorts with pleasure.

Russell Peters — When dunces rule the roost, it’s no coincidence that drug addicts are their followers. The so-called comedian Russell Peters, and a rabid apologist of AIB, is a former drug addict and a drug trafficker. What sick times of moral decadence the modern society must be in when when rabid junkies like him are considered role models and intellectuals. He didn’t kill anyone but he wrecked thousands of innocent lives with drug peddling. But all that is never accounted for. No one has the courage to confront him.

He can make fun of anyone but no one is allowed to criticise him. Russel Peters can drop dead and rot in hell. I am not afraid of him or his Fascist fans. He has the face of a rabid mastiff dog sewn on a human body. He is a cross between a human and a rabid dog.

Any dictator would be proud of him. The ruse of comedy allows him to spread hate with ease. There is nothing wrong with making fun of cultural and religious stereotypes. But it’s the intent that matters the most. Russell Peters’ intent is that of a Fascist, his comments full of hatred and downright contempt. To those who find him harmless, ask yourselves a question: would think the same if he were a Caucasian? There is no way the people would find him funny if he were a white British boy. He would be chastised by the Left and the Right and deemed racist.

He is embarrassed of his Indian ancestry and calls himself an Anglo-Indian. It’s a shame that Indian media and politicians put him on such a high pedestal, just because of his supposedly Indian roots. They call him “one of us” when he clearly considers himself superior to them. The shameless politicians and actors click “selfies” with him, treat him like a God whenever they meet him. Despite his condescending attitude towards India, this hypocrite likes to meddle with India’s internal matters. He criticised Aamir Khan for not liking AIB Roast. However, when his buddy Anupam Kher criticised AIB, he didn’t say a word. It’s obvious that both have common political interests with BJP. But what’s perplexing is BJP’s sycophancy towards him. This bastard gloats about championing equal rights, yet he supports frauds like Baba Ramdev who claim to have a “cure” for homosexuality. 

Like many Fascists, he uses snobbery to sell himself. “If you don’t like Russell Peters, you are not smart” — that’s the killer motto exploited for centuries to spread Fascism. 

Dixon Loda — The second disciple is not a celebrity. He is just an ordinary loser named Dixon Loda. He is in his late thirties, yet he has no job. His biggest achievement in his life is that he watched an entire season of Breaking Bad in a day. He shows pride in doing a great “social service” by watching movies that AIB recommends. That’s fine. He can do whatever he wants but the trouble is that he abuses people who watch Satyamev Jayate. He makes fun of Aamir Khan’s remuneration thereof. Of course, a loser who has never earned a penny in his life is bound to be outraged at that. He has problems with Aamir Khan’s high fees in per episode but he never questions Tanmay Bhat’s income; he has no problems with Russell Peters’ exorbitant earning from his asinine shows.

Media likes to tell us that people who like AIB are better than others. It’s anything but that. This stupid bellyacher, who is an portrayed as an ideal fan of AIB, lived on his wife’s income after marriage. She tried persuading him to work. She took him to counsellors and psychiatrists, but to no avail. When all the modern techniques failed, she hauled him to the desi quack Baba Ramdev but even that couldn’t save this pathetic loser. On top of that, he is an alcoholic and a proud drug addict (like many other bhakts of AIB). After years of struggle, his wife had no choice but to terminate the wedding. Now he is back to his parents’ house, living on their income, popping pills and sniffing cocaine with his like-minded zealots of AIB. His only qualification is that he pretends to like highbrow cinema. That’s all it takes to succeed these days. 

Propaganda Model of AIB

To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticise. Voltaire could very well have said that for All India Bakchod (popularly known as AIB) channel. Aamir Khan found that out last year when he politely — I repeat, politely — criticised AIB Roast. The “intolerance gate” surrounding him is a mere repercussion of his comments on AIB. It all began from there. Nasseeruddin Shah has talked about “hate mongering” but he has never faced any wrath, because he has never crossed paths with AIB. Justice Markandey Katju has called Narendra Modi a “fraud” but his patriotism is never questioned by BJP’s supporters. Unlike Aamir Khan, Katju is a political person; hence, his political opinions should be taken more seriously but they are ignored. Why? Because AIB doesn’t hate him. Vishal Dadlani is a huge critic of the Right-wing. He barely draws any ire. It’s no coincidence that he is AIB’s sycophant.

AIB is a group of pseudo-intellectual Fascists in the guise of comedians. They are ruthless, powerful and evil. They are backed by top corporations like Amul, powerful filmmakers to spread propaganda, film studios like UTV, top politicians, Godmen and influential writers like Shobha De. I won’t be surprised if they have the support of mafia as well. They follow a devious propaganda model. They can say anything in the name of humour, but if anyone objects or even mildly criticises them, it is portrayed as an assault on art and freedom. It’s ironic that they don’t value the freedom of speech of their critics, yet it is a very cunning tactic. Thereafter, their enemy is subject to serious character assassination and much more, just like Aamir Khan. He has lost his advertisement contracts with major corporations. (Is it a coincidence that a criticism of AIB Roast has cost him all the endorsements contracts.) Moreover, he is no longer an ambassador of Incredible India (a campaign to promote tourism in India). He has become an object of wrath and ridicule on social media because of AIB and Shobha De’s treachery.

Their propaganda strategy for AIB Roast was exemplary. It was sensationalist propaganda to promote their channel and Anurag Kashyap’s then-forthcoming film. At first, media and Right-wing politicians severely rebuked it. Some political activists (like Ashok Pandit) filed lawsuits against AIB and Anurag Kashyap. Curiously, the hysteria died down as soon as the Roast gained publicity. The people who were on a rabid rage against the AIB Roast, took a sudden U-turn: they started slandering those who didn’t like the Roast. The only explanation is that they were always on AIB’s side. Now Ashok Pandit is their biggest sycophant. It was a cunning marketing gimmick.

Another propaganda tactic they use is by spreading rumours or “trending tweets” of how some people want them banned. But in reality, hardly anyone is interested in banning AIB, except for a handful of idiots. But this propaganda gives them moral wattage and sympathy votes. How can the Right-wing call for their ban, when a hard-core Rightist like Shobha De fanatically defends AIB? How can the authority want them banned when they are a part of the authority?

Shobha De’s inflammatory comments have worked wonders for them. She has gone on a rabid rage, degrading those who didn’t like AIB Roast. The ageist gorgon made fun of Aamir Khan’s age and proclaimed that most of India’s youngsters wouldn’t relate to his views. So, would they relate to Anurag Kashyap’s thinking, for he was an endorser of AIB? That deranged druggie queen sits on her rocking chair and fabricates her deep fetishes. Ninety-ninety percent of India’s youth would not have even heard of Anurag Kashyap or AIB. Whereas, many of many of Aamir Khan’s fans are in their teens or twenties. In particular, his movies like Rang De Basanti, Taare Zameen Par and 3 Idiots are very popular amongst the youth of India. Hardly any teenager cares about Gangs of Wasseypur or AIB’s propaganda videos. Even if a few did, it would be out of fear rather than admiration. If people over a certain age shouldn’t express themselves in public then maybe Shobha De should jump off a hill because she is a few decades older than Aamir Khan. Or is it just that the imperialistic harpy is only interested in carrying out character assassination of actors with a certain last name? If she is so worried about AIB, then why didn’t she speak against people who filed lawsuits against AIB?

AIB also typifies the disturbing class hierarchy of India. The comedian Kiku Sharda was arrested for impersonating Godman Gurmeet Ram Raheem Insan. Would AIB have been arrested had they put up a similar act? (It’s another thing that the Godman is likely to be their cohort.) But even if they aren’t his bhakts (disciples), nobody would have dared to arrest them. The reason is simple: Kiku Sharda is a lowbrow comedian who entertains common people; whereas, AIB constitutes of the so-called elite of India, the English-speaking, American TV and Hollywood-fanatic brigade of peanut-brained yuppies. There were voices of dissent for their mockery of Salman Khan’s sister, but the voices were silenced. But AIB are a bunch of bullies who only pick on non-violent targets, who prefer to critique with reason. If those rabid bastards ever insulted someone’s sister in rural India or the drug-free zones of Punjab, no one would reason with them; instead, they would be neutered and battered vigilante style and their stupid testicles would be fed to cats.

Their foreign ally, Russell Peters, scowled like a mad dog when some people didn’t like AIB Roast. But the racist coward didn’t say a word about Kiku Sharda’s arrest. It is because of the same class hierarchy. Kiku represents the same average Indian that he racially degrades in his so-called comedy. On the other hand, AIB represent the powerful, pseudo-intellectual yuppies who get their buttocks licked by the likes of Russell Peters.

AIB is just one example. They have crony Youtube channels (like VFV) who do the same kind of work. They consider themselves thekedar (custodians) of Indian cinema and society. They have turned cinema into a private club. They decide who is eligible to watch Satyajit Ray’s movies or not. They police people’s taste in movies. They intimidate those who don’t like Anurag Kashyap’s movies. Ship of Thesus is called “Ship of Pretentious” because it’s produced by Aamir Khan’s wife Kiran Rao. However, their choice of reviews is highly selective. They have never reviewed the Godman’s movie. It’s either because they were afraid to ridicule that movie or they were afraid to admit that they liked it. Remember, AIB acknowledged Kamaal R. Khan amongst the top film critics of India. How can such brainless bastards be taken seriously? A few months later Kamaal R. Khan ridiculed Anurag Kashyap’s Bombay Velvet and even issued a stupid challenge where he would chop his genital if the movie made one billion, to which Anurag Kashyap replied earnestly. It was just a subterfuge to create sympathy for the film. Because even though the movie was a disaster, hardly anyone criticised it. But his phoney criticism allowed them to cry that “look everyone is trying to sabotage our film”, “Anurag Kashyap is too good for Indian public”, “death to those who watch cinema for entertainment” etc.

If you think that AIB is not powerful, then try to criticise them or search for their critics. You will find nothing. And it’s not because everyone loves them.