THE KERALA STORY: FACTS ARE SACRED, COMMENT IS FREE

The ominous influx of terrorism cloaking the streets of Kerala is seemingly no more than a mere instance of propaganda for the champions of free speech today as ‘The Kerala Story’ embarks its release on May 5. The trailer depicts the protagonist ‘Shalini Unnikrishnan’ who is manipulated, converted and further identifies herself as an ISIS terrorist. The central concern of the movie, terrorism is well-established within the first twelve seconds of the trailer. With a constitution that enshrines free speech as a fundamental right and a democracy that has been the harbinger to ushering the same, the state has defended on legal and moral grounds its strong anathema to partisan censorship of creative works.

The movie has stirred widespread debate within the country, with certain political parties and organizations even demanding a ban on the movie. Certain factions claim the number (32000) of women having been recruited in the ISIS is a highly inflated value, while others seem to be deeply aggrieved about the title highlighting Kerala, and possibly putting the secular narrative the state has managed to create at stake. What is most alarming and perhaps even disturbing is the argument that the movie seems to trigger the religious sentiments of a certain community in the country and that the movie goes against the ethos of secularism and harmony.

Numbers can be and certainly has to be subjected to debate. While one may claim the extent of the numbers, one cannot possibly dismiss the existence of the narrative. For those raising flak on the title, the logical defence would be a rather commonsensical submission that the movie specifically portrays a ‘Kerala-specific’ scenario. When those raising these hollow and narrow arguments are rendered defenceless, the weapon that comes to their defence is secularism and communal harmony.

What one witnesses in debates are hysterical panelists working themselves to a frenzy of rage atrociously proclaiming that the secular fabric of the country is under threat. Drawing parallels between a religion and radical organizations unleashing terror in the name of religion is what has to be truly condemned. These self-styled saviors of democracy and free speech have gone to the extent of calling such youth, masqueraded as pursuers of love, ‘innocent and misguided men’.

Even as this lobby, that practices appeasement politics at the cost of national unity, seems to be vociferously concerned about certain sections of the population, the stark reality that seldom goes unnoticed is their selective silence when it comes to the concerns of the majority in the country; be it religious, social or political.

There are myriad instances of the sentiments of other sections of the population being hurt by their distinct portrayal on creative platforms. From a poster of goddess ‘Kali’ smoking a cigarette to the Indian army being overtly portrayed as an abusive force in ‘Haider’, the examples are innumerable. The former was claimed to be an instance of creative liberty. In the latter case, it was specifically claimed that even if one such instance of brutality is reported, it is of grave concern. The very same ideologues today debate the thirty-two thousand figure portrayed in the movie. When the fulcrum of the debate had to be the destructive ecosystem in the state giving a fillip to radical activities, taking an active position against the very existence and operation of such units here and questioning the dispensations both at the state and the centre about the same, our fellow think tanks fashionably chose to revert to the same old appeasement politics.  

It was not long ago that author S Hareesh was hailed for his novel ‘Meesha’ which made explicitly atrocious remarks about temple-going women. It is appalling that the intellectual mass making grand speeches on religious sentiments chose to keep their lips pursed in this instance.

It is nothing but the institution of fear that has forced these ideologues, think tanks and intellects to come to the rescue of minority sentiments under the fallacy of inciting fear and thereby associate terrorism with particular religions and communities.

The protests being flagged by a particular political party is a clear case of irony. A dispensation that has left its wounds so deep that the country still bleeds from its scar, considers itself worthy enough to make high-end remarks about free speech. The number of books, movies, plays etc banned by this government under emergency is perhaps the darkest age, the art of independent India has witnessed in its lifetime.

The truth is so brutal, brutally honest that it sinks deep into the crevices of the consciousness of those whose covert agenda is to destroy the secular fabric native to our civilization. Certain elitist groups who suggest that Kerala is the haven of peace should give themselves a fact check about reported instances of radicalization and reports released by several agencies regarding the same. The same elitists who impose the narrative that the state is a paradise where peace prevails are those sitting in their ivory towers and know little about the misery of the common man. These pseudo-liberals raise mundane arguments backed by populist, hollow schools of thoughts they claim are philosophies.

The supreme court has given its nod to the release of the film and what follows can be debated amicably without violating the bounds of the holistic, secular fabric of the country or without being vindictive and hateful towards the majority. Radicalization and terrorism have to be strongly condemned, for it affects the very national integrity and security and puts at stake the lives of hundreds of thousands of its citizens. The uproar raised by these factions against anything that goes against their set agenda has become ad-nauseam that it almost seems like the norm. One would hopefully not be visibly blind against cases of forced conversion and radicalization or, has terrorism become too blasé a phenomenon that it is longer considered important to be recognized or portrayed. Why else would a graphic portrayal of instances of ‘terrorism’ create a Cambrian explosion within sections of the state?

And for the fact-checkers basing their arguments on numbers, the kind reminder would be; be it 32000, 3000, 32 or 3, even one life at stake is one too many.