Take a close look at the ongoing expansion of the Adani Group across the MMR region.
Certain forces, still resentful that Mumbai remained with Maharashtra and did not go to Gujarat, are now attemptingтАФthrough this corporate giantтАФto gain influence and control over Mumbai and the wider MMR.
The Adani GroupтАЩs growing footprint in the MMR deserves careful attention.
тАЬNo nation can be grateful at the cost of its libertyтАЭ - these are the words of Bharat Ratna Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar. He made this profound statement while presenting the draft of the Indian Constitution in November 1949. The nation's values of freedom and expression must never be jeopardized for the sake of blind devotion to a leader or to indulge their eccentric behavior.
This statement needs to be reiterated today because the duo of Modi and Shah harbors an extreme authoritarian mindset. Leveraging this authoritarianism, they captured the country's institutions to seize power. Power that is now being wielded solely to serve the interests of a handful of industrialists. If protesters are to be crushed and arrested simply for opposing this arrogant abuse of power or demonstrating against it, then this unchecked tyranny must be uprooted from the country, from the grassroots to the highest levels.
Are protests forbidden in this country? Are questions not to be asked? Who are you to snatch away the right to protest? Protests have been ongoing in Delhi since October 3rd, demanding the resignation of the corrupt Chief Election Commissioner, Gyanesh Kumar. Using the Delhi Police as an instrument, the government not only crushed protesters but also harassed the female journalists covering the agitation.
Fearing protests in Delhi today, you have shut down metro services, blocked roads, suspended internet and bus services, and are even detaining protesters directly from flights. What kind of approach is this? Young men and women in their twenties and thirties across the country are restless; they cannot see a future for themselves. That is why they are taking to the streets to protest peacefully, and you are trying to crush them? With what face will Modi go around the world claiming that our country is democratic? Is this democracy?
I donтАЩt understand this immense love for Gyanesh Kumar. Is it because Gyanesh Kumar, and the election officials before him, are your instruments for seizing power? The Election Commission is an autonomous body. WhatтАЩs wrong in demanding the resignation of its chief if he has messed up things? WhatтАЩs wrong with wanting an honest and transparent electoral system? My right to vote is being taken away, I am unable to track where and to whom my vote is going. DonтАЩt I have the right to express my anger when my vote is getting insulted this way? Or is it that the two leaders at the top fear that if Gyanesh Kumar is forced to resign and reveals the masterminds behind the vote theft, the entire charade of their power will be exposed?
Under Articles 19(1)(a) and (b) of the Indian Constitution, citizens have the full right to stage peaceful protests. Why do you wish to crush this right? Just yesterday, the Honorable Supreme Court asked, "Why use a sledgehammer to swat a fly?" Typically, the police department in Maharashtra detains protesters and then releases them, ensuring that citizens' constitutional rights remain intact in the process. But in Delhi, female journalists covering the protest have complained of harassment by the police after being detained. If those covering the protest are being harassed, what guarantee is there that the protesters themselves will be treated properly?
It appears that the anger over the youth of this country forcing you to yield and compelling Dharmendra Pradhan to resign has not yet subsided. During the Anna Hazare agitation, Modi and Shah allowed protests to take place in Gujarat because it served their interests; yet, while in power in that very state, they crushed numerous protests against their own government. In short, their hypocrisy and double standards are glaringly obvious.
Veteran actor Nana Patekar has passed away.
The Hindi film industry and Mumbai share an inseparable bond. When one speaks of Mumbai, it encompasses its theatre, its world of commercial cinema, and the middle and lower-middle classes striving daily to carve out their identity, from slums to chawls. Then came the working class that gradually faced ruin in this city and across the country; the rise of the underworld born out of that social despair; the period where communal harmony unraveled before our eyes; followed by the post-liberalization expansion of middle-class aspirations and the politics swirling around it all. Through every such era, Nana Patekar made his presence felt, sometimes on stage, sometimes on screen. From тАШHamidabai Chi KothiтАЩ to тАШParindaя┐╜я┐╜я┐╜, тАШKrantiveerтАЩ, тАШAb Tak ChhappanтАЩ, and all the way to тАШNatasamratтАЩ, Nana remained ever-present. Across each phase, he brought to life, whether on the screen or the stage, the common man living with persistent inner turmoil.
Anger, humiliation, powerlessness, despair, revulsion toward immorality, disillusionment with the system, and class struggle constantly simmer within the mind of the common man. It spills over only occasionally through petty arguments or domestic turmoil. Otherwise, it stays bottled up inside. Watching Nana perform felt like looking into this emotional pressure cooker of ordinary lives. When Nana, or the 'Angry Young Man' Amitabh Bachchan, confronted these realities on screen, they vented the steam trapped within the human psyche. As I often say, just as singers and composers like Lata didi, Asha tai, Kishore Kumar, and Rafi sahab, along with filmmakers, playwrights, directors, and artists, entertained Indian minds for at least 60 to 70 years, figures like Nana and Bachchan Sahab powerfully released that inner steam on screen. Had they not done so, chaos might have erupted in this country every month.
Watching Nana act always reminded me of Hollywood's Morgan Freeman. Neither fit the conventional type of Bollywood or Hollywood actors of their times in terms of looks or persona. Watching Morgan Freeman, one often feels this is a man who has absorbed wisdom, patience, and a quiet acceptance of things as they are over time. With Nana's acting, however, I sensed fury, restlessness, and a deeply entrenched despair. Freeman represents a man who seems to have seen it all; Nana represents a man who has endured too much and can take no more. These are two opposite ends of the human spectrum. Because Nana could bring that second extreme to the screen with raw authenticity, he was a truly great artist.
In the 2000s, polished, fair, and conventional leading men began making way for story-driven cinema, ushering in an era of character actors who could carry a narrative and draw audiences on merit. Nana was undoubtedly the pioneer of this era. The prominence that character actors enjoy today was paved by Nana.
Yet, despite all this, he was fiercely individualistic, spoke his mind without filter, and was outspoken (though it hardly suits me to call anyone outspoken; be that as it may). Because of this, even when producers and directors wished to cast him, they often hesitated. Did this hurt Nana? One cannot say; he remained indifferent. But it certainly deprived Hindi cinema and its audience. While Nawazuddin Siddiqui and the late Irrfan Khan were undoubtedly brilliant performers, one wonders whether they and others like them would have found those same opportunities had Nana been willing to compromise. Moreover, Nana was not confined to aggressive or intense roles, through films like тАШWelcomeтАЩ, he demonstrated to the world that he could handle comedy with equal prowess.