- Bollywood experiences a surge in nationalist themes, drawing significant attention and success at the box office.
- Liberal audiences and critics accuse these films of altering historical narratives and promoting a Hindu nationalist agenda.
- “Swatantra Veer Savarkar” biopic becomes a focal point of controversy, sparking debate over its portrayal of Indian history and nationalism.
- As usual, the Western media is misrepresenting facts to fit their anti-Hindu narratives.
- Regardless, the popularity of nationalist films among Indian audiences suggests a growing demand for cinema that aligns with patriotic sentiments and challenges previously dominant liberal narratives.
The rise of nationalism in Indian cinema is a noticeable trend as filmmakers increasingly incorporate national pride, Hindu culture, and historical events or figures in their storylines. This trend gained significant traction in the past decade, particularly with films like Uri: The Surgical Strike, Tanaji, Manikarnika: The Queen of Jhansi, The Kashmir Files, and Kesari, among others.
Unmitigated Hinduphobia is the norm these days, and the liberals, both in India and the West, are alarmed. Used to stereotypical characters such as the noble Abdul Chacha (uncle) and the large-hearted Christian padre, who exist only in Bollywood’s fantasy land, the liberals are having a collective meltdown. As these movies go against the narrative of the past 70 years, the cabal is pushing back. Their current target is the biopic Swatantra Veer Savarkar.
The movie is based on the life of the Maharashtrian freedom fighter Vinayak Damodardas Savarkar, who is now acknowledged as the revolutionary who did more to free India from the clutches of imperialist Britain than Mohandas Gandhi. This is best illustrated by the cold fact that Savarkar was sentenced to 50 years in prison (two life terms). For a period of 10 years, from 1911 to 1921, he was lodged in brutal and inhuman conditions in the notorious Cellular Jail in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands.[1] After the British decided to close the prison, he was sent to high-security jails in mainland India before being finally released in 1924.[2]
In contrast, Gandhi never spent more than a few days or weeks each time he was arrested and was kept in minimum security prisons.[3] Plus, the longest term he ever served was from 1942-45 for the Quit India Movement, for which his designated ‘jail’ was the vast palace of the Aga Khan surrounded by a sprawling and salubrious 19-acre park.[4]
But don’t let facts prevent you from peddling propaganda. In March 2024, the Associated Press published an article titled “As India’s election nears, some Bollywood films promote Modi politics by embracing Hindu nationalism.” The writer is Sheikh Saaliq, a virulent Hinduphobe. The Delhi-based writer’s agenda-fueled journalism is evident from his author page, which doesn’t have a single positive story about India or Hindus. On the contrary, his articles follow a consistent pattern of twisting facts and presenting any action by India as an assault on Muslim rights.[5] It’s a clear indication of a radicalized mind filled with obsessive hatred towards Hindus and India. Unfortunately, in the name of DEI, AP provides him a platform to push his Hinduphobic views into the public domain.
Saaliq’s chief bone of contention is that Swatantra Veer Savarkar “coincides with a cluster of upcoming Bollywood releases based on polarizing issues, which either promote Modi and his government’s political agenda or lambast his critics.”
“Under Modi’s Hindu nationalist government, many filmmakers have made movies on bygone Hindu kings extolling their bravery. Boisterous and action-packed movies valorizing the Indian Army have become box-office successes. Political dramas and biopics that eulogize Hindu nationalists are the norm. In most of these films, the stock villains are medieval Muslim rulers, leftist or opposition leaders, free thinkers or rights activists — and neighboring Pakistan, India’s arch-rival. The biopic on Savarkar, who advocated for India’s future as a Hindu nation, is emblematic of this broader trend.”
Twisting facts
The Western media prides itself on its extensive fact-checking resources and processes. It has a battery of line editors and fact-checkers in their newsrooms who sift through stories before publication. In this backdrop, it is a mystery how AP allowed Saaliq to employ a mix of selective facts and blatant lies in his article. For instance, he says two more upcoming films claim to reveal a “conspiracy” about a 2002 “train fire in western Gujarat” that ignited one of the worst anti-Muslim riots in India.
First up, the writer disingenuously leaves out the fact that the “train fire” was a calculated and well-planned burning of innocent Hindu pilgrims by Muslims. On February 27, 2002, a coach of the Sabarmati Express was returning with passengers from the Ram Temple site in Ayodhya when it was set ablaze near Godhra railway station in the state of Gujarat by a large Muslim mob. As many as 59 Hindu devotees, including children, one of whom was just 16 days old, were charred to death in the train attack. The incident triggered religious riots across Gujarat.[6]
In March 2011, a trial court handed down convictions to 31 individuals, with 20 receiving life sentences and 11 facing the gallows. Some of the defendants asserted their involvement was confined to stone pelting or purchasing petrol. However, the state viewed the conspiracy as grave, as the train carriage was bolted shut from the outside before being set ablaze, with stones hurled to prevent any escape.[7] This was no train fire; it was a pogrom. Liberals somehow delink the Godhra burnings from the Gujarat riots.
The fact that AP played along with Saaliq’s propaganda and did not do a basic fact check suggests the news agency isn’t interested in the truth but, on the contrary, is happy to promote a narrative that tarnishes Hindus and India.
Moving on, Saaliq says, “More than 1,000 people, mostly Muslims, were killed in riots. It was a hugely controversial episode in Modi’s political career, as he was the chief minister of Gujarat at the time.”
Again, he omits the truth that of the more than 1,000 people who were killed, 254 were Hindus.”[8] At this point, the AP article loses all credibility as it is directed at portraying one side as the villain and the other as the victim. The fact that AP played along with Saaliq’s propaganda and did not do a basic fact check suggests the news agency isn’t interested in the truth but, on the contrary, is happy to promote a narrative that tarnishes Hindus and India.
As well as a bigot, Saaliq comes across as a rather ordinary journalist. Perhaps he resorts to verbiage to increase the word count of his article. This he achieves by taking a shot at Bastar, a film based on the Maoist insurgency in central Indian jungles. “Its primary villains, apart from the insurgents, were rights activists and left-leaning intellectuals. One critic called it “two hours of diatribe against communism.”
So, what exactly is the problem here? Isn’t communism a discredited idea that has been junked by almost every country where it was forcibly imposed? Didn’t every self-respecting European nation give it the boot? Russia, where it all started, banned communism in 1991.[9] But then Islamists and communists are strange bedfellows, and people like Saaliq don’t mind making temporary alliances with communists in line with the Quranic concept of taqiyya. For those not in the loop, taqiyya allows Muslims to lie and pretend to be friends with non-Muslims when Muslims are weak. Muslims can abrogate these friendships when they are in a stronger position.[10]
Rise of the hacks
Like Swatantra Veer Savarkar, a string of releases in recent months have got the liberals in a tizzy. In Animal, the film chooses a swastika as the logo of the main character’s company, and he explains that theirs is not the tilted swastika used by the Nazis. In a review for The Guardian, Vietnamese-American actor and filmmaker Phong comments: “This cloying pretense of self-awareness only makes the flirtation with right-wing iconography all the more unpleasant.”[11]
But then Islamists and communists are strange bedfellows, and people like Saaliq don’t mind making temporary alliances with communists in line with the Quranic concept of taqiyya.
Again, Fighter, a film about Indian Air Force pilots taking on Islamic terrorists in Pakistan, seems to have upset the UK-based Empire, which describes itself as the world’s biggest movie magazine. Its Bollywood film critic Timon Singh says the movie “delivers exactly what you’d expect from an Indian military blockbuster – excitement, passion, and a level of patriotism that’s equivalent to being repeatedly punched in the face with the Indian tricolor.”[12]
Mumbai-based DM Talkies, which describes itself as a collective endeavor, calls Fighter “overwhelmingly jingoistic, stupid, and boring.” Its critic, Pramit Chatterjee, who has inexplicably blocked me on X (formerly Twitter), says: “All in all, Fighter is a poorly made, bigoted, jingoistic, and boring movie. The filmmaking on display is bad. The story and the storytelling are horrendous. The performances are forgettable. If you want your dose of toxic nationalism so that you can fantasize about the Indian Armed Forces occupying Pakistan, just re-watch the trailer because that line is there in the trailer. Given how that moment arrives at the tail-end of the movie, I don’t know how gung-ho you will be about hearing it on the speakers of the theater. By the way, if you are gung-ho about hypernationalism, please calm down. The world doesn’t need any more angry people.”[13]
Film magazines should teach Chatterjee’s article as a classic example of how not to write a review. Despite my aversion to Bollywood, I watched Fighter, and I can honestly state that “boring” it is not. The movie is certainly not in the Top Gun category in terms of script, which has always been Bollywood’s Achilles Heel and has several cringe moments. Still, in the end, it entertains you via suspension of disbelief – a state of mind in which readers willingly ignore blatant untruths and fantastic elements to allow themselves to enjoy a film.[14] Chatterjee really shot himself in the foot here. I mean, if you are so biased against nationalism that you can’t be honest in your review and have to resort to lying to stop people from watching the movie, then you are not a film critic but just a hack.
Losing battle
Liberals – and their foreign friends – should realize that they are fighting a losing battle. After decades of being lied to and fed a stale staple of secularism, audiences want better. There are several reasons behind the surge in nationalist narratives in Indian movies:
Audience Demand: Filmmakers often respond to the demands of their audience. In recent years, there has been a growing sentiment of nationalism among the Indian population, fueled by various socio-political factors. Films that tap into this sentiment resonate well with audiences and often perform exceptionally well at the box office.
Political Climate: The political landscape in India has seen a rise in nationalist rhetoric, with the ruling government emphasizing themes of patriotism and national identity. This has inevitably influenced various aspects of Indian culture, including cinema.
Market Forces: Bollywood is a commercial industry, and filmmakers are keenly aware of the market forces that drive success. Nationalist films have proven commercially viable, leading to more productions with similar themes.
Citations
[1] The Story of My Transportation for Life.pdf (bjp.org); https://library.bjp.org/jspui/bitstream/123456789/292/1/The%20Story%20of%20My%20Transportation%20for%20Life.pdf
[2] Vinayak Damodar Savarkar: A man convicted for his patriotism – Firstpost; https://www.firstpost.com/opinion-news-expert-views-news-analysis-firstpost-viewpoint/vinayak-damodar-savarkar-a-man-convicted-for-his-patriotism-11661461.html
[3] Gandhi Timeline – Mahatma Gandhi Chronology – Gandhi Event Chronology (gandhiheritageportal.org); https://www.gandhiheritageportal.org/chronology/event-chronology-listing/MTE=
[4] Aga Khan Palace Foundation, Gandhiji’s prison and now an Oasis in Pune – Story at Every Corner; https://storyateverycorner.com/agakhan-palace-pune/
[5] SHEIKH SAALIQ | AP News; https://apnews.com/author/sheikh-saaliq
[6] 2002 Gujarat riots: 20 years on, wounds remain fresh | Latest News India – Hindustan Times; https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/2002-gujarat-riots-20-years-on-wounds-remain-fresh-101645987291256.html
[7] Gujarat government to press for death to 11 Godhra train-burning convicts | Latest News India – Hindustan Times; https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/will-seek-death-penalty-for-godhra-train-burning-convicts-gujarat-to-supreme-court-101676922124902.html
[8] 2002 Gujarat riots: 20 years on, wounds remain fresh | Latest News India – Hindustan Times; https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/2002-gujarat-riots-20-years-on-wounds-remain-fresh-101645987291256.html
[9] Yeltsin bans Communist Party – UPI Archives; https://www.upi.com/Archives/1991/11/06/Yeltsin-bans-Communist-Party/1265689403600/
[10] Taqiyya – Wikipedia; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taqiyya#:~:text=Generally%2C%20taqiyya%20is%20the%20action,between%20Sunni%20and%20Shia%20Muslims
[11] Animal review – Ranbir Kapoor plays one of the vilest protagonists in cinema history | Movies | The Guardian; https://www.theguardian.com/film/2023/dec/02/animal-review-ranbir-kapoor-plays-one-of-the-vilest-protagonists-in-cinema-history
[12] Fighter Review – ‘Exactly what you’d expect from an Indian military blockbuster’ (empireonline.com); https://www.empireonline.com/movies/reviews/fighter-2024/
[13] ‘Fighter’ Review: Siddharth Anand’s Ill-Intentioned ‘Top Gun’ Rip-Off Induces Sleep, Not Nationalism (dmtalkies.com); https://dmtalkies.com/fighter-review-2024-indian-film-siddharth-anand-hrithik-roshan/
[14] Poet and philosopher William Coleridge coined the phrase “suspension of disbelief” to describe a state of mind in which readers willingly ignore obvious untruths and fantastic elements in literature in order to allow themselves to enjoy the story. He called it a form of “poetic faith.”