Latest
DU Beat – Delhi University's Independent Student Newspaper
Author

DU Beat

Browsing
DUB News

HC Interim Order Grants Relief to JNU Students

By

Delhi High Court places an interim order against the new JNU Hostel manual and asks JNU administration to keep registration fees, reservations, and priorities according to the old manual.

On 28thOctober 2019, The Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) Administration unveiled a new hostel manual with extremely steep hostel fee hikes. The rationale given by the JNU administration was that the hostel fees had not been revised for 19 years. However, these overall fee hikes would have led to JNU becoming one of the most expensive central universities in the country. The Jawaharlal Nehru University Students’ Union (JNUSU) held massive and continuous protests against the decision by the administration, stating that according to the University’s own annual reports, 40% of the students who come from lower income backgrounds would not be able to afford the revised fees and would have to pursue education elsewhere, if at all.

 

Earlier this week, the Delhi High Court has granted a major relief to the students of JNU upon hearing a petition filed by AIshe Ghosh, JNUSU President and other office bearers against the new hostel Manual. According to a legal update dated 24th January, 2020, from JNUSU. The High Court has directed the JNU Administration to:

Firstly, allow for registration at old rates, as per the previous hostel manual; for students yet to register. Secondly, extend the last date of registration for a week without late fine. Thirdly, apply reservations and priorities/benefits according to the old hostel manual. And lastly, to hold dialogue with the students in order to resolve the issue.

Justice Rajiv Shakdher, who was hearing the case, points out that “Government can’t get out of education. Government has to fund public education. The burden of paying the salaries of contractual workers is not on the students. Someone has to find the funds.”

The next hearing of the case will be held on 28thFebruary , 2020.

 

Feature Image Credits: The Print

 

Prabhanu Kumar Das

[email protected]

 

Keep Reading
By
DUB Speak

You Are Not Welcome Here, Mr Bolsonaro

By

This year, India’s guest for the Republic Day Parade is Jair Bolsonaro, the President of Brazil. And it shouldn’t be a cause of celebration.

Trigger Warning: Rape, Homophobia.

From the likes of Mandela, who have changed history for generations to come, to the likes of Bolsonaro, who has somehow single-handedly managed to ruin the world’s largest forests, it hasn’t been much of a glow-up for India.

 

Republic Day is a reminder of the concept of a Republic, a concept emphasising the Constitutional values that have guided us over the years and the equality of all citizens. The founding of the Republic was a very significant step for this newly independent nation of India, and needless to say, it is a proud day for us.

 

Bolsonaro is another fish swimming in the current populist wave. Erdogan in Turkey, Trump in the United States, and the recently elected Boris Johnson in the United Kingdom are some other popular examples showing this rise is extremist leaders; all of them are leaders who have no problem expressing themselves in vile ways, as long as it appeals to the masses. Unsurprisingly, they also have limited patience for dissent and are extremely right-wing. Does this ring a bell?

 

A man notorious for his policies, Bolsonaro’s stances on environment, LGBTQ+ rights, women, and democracy are deeply problematic. He’s a far-right politician known to be openly racist, misogynistic, homophobic, and militaristic. A quick search of his name would easily lead you to hundreds of articles describing his controversial statements and inflammatory takes on everything you could care about.

 

The Amazon fires of 2019, which were a stark, unmistakable reminder of how destroyed the earth truly is, had one man to blame. He has also been caught on tape while calling himself, “a proud homophobe,” and saying he had rather have his son die in a car crash than be gay.

 

“I am not going to rape you, because you are very ugly,” said he to a female politician in 2014. “Elections won’t change anything in this country. It will only change on the day that we break out in civil war here and do the job that the military regime didn’t do: killing 30,000. If some innocent people die, that’s fine. In every war, innocent people die,” said the right-wing leader in an interview in 1999.

 

Not only is his speech provocative, but it also is his policy-making atrocious. Brazil is also home to 17 of the 50 most violent cities in the world and has the world’s highest homicide rate. Bolsonaro pledged to tackle this security crisis: he relaxed gun ownership restrictions. He also scrapped Brazil’s Human Rights Minister, and created a position of a Minister of ‘Family Values,’ placing an ultraconservative pastor at the post. Doesn’t this ring a bell too?

 

“Bolsonaro is a political figure I don’t wish to see on such an occasion. He is against everything I stand for. But, honestly, I can’t say I didn’t see this coming. After this country’s policy changes and the ridiculous direction it is going, I suppose the worse is yet to come,” said Mrinalini, a third-year student.

 

Considered close to leaders such as Donald Trump, he’s had spats with France’s Macron, Germany’s Angela Merkel, and Norwegian leaders, over his exploitation of the Amazon. Needless to say, he isn’t a leader other respectable world leaders are tripping over their feet to befriend. This is why Modi’s growing comradeship with the Brazilian leader speaks even louder.

 

His statements and actions are evidence why he shouldn’t be suitable for an occasion as esteemed as this. However, it isn’t surprising that the Modi Government thinks otherwise. Modi, after all, is a part of the same extremist club too. And, well, birds of a feather flock together.

 

Image Credits:Bloomberg

 

Satviki Sanjay

[email protected]

 

Keep Reading
By
Arts & Culture

When Personal is Political: Dating and Dissent

By

This piece aims to highlight how nothing is apolitical anymore; politics with its lasting presence is now even shaping the dating lives of the Indian youth.

In a day and age where the youth has risen up to combat the elements of fascism in the country, and uphold the values of democracy laid down in the Constitution; the personal is political, now more than ever. The integrity of Law and Order as well as the Government is being increasingly questioned; the youth today demands answers from a generation that has led them into the pits of a civilisation. However, one wonders, in these times, how does a 19 year old college student deal with their own partner; supporting something they’re out on the streets against? How does the youth navigate the landscape of relationships, dating, and attraction; in a politically charged climate with barbed opinions and perspectives oft en clashing against their own? The answer to the question rests within the reality we currently are entrapped in.

In today’s time, ideological differences take a backseat over, what is now, your stance on human rights. Triparna Dutta, a student of the University of Calcutta, said, “The stakes are high, blood is being shed. It’s impossible to date someone who doesn’t care about human rights, about dissent and the constitution.” A study by Gregory A. Huber of Yale University and Neil Malhotra of Stanford University showed that political affiliation is fast becoming a factor in how people choose who they date (Having a 3 per cent impact, the same as education), while shared race and religion have far more of an impact. Shared religious beliefs result in a 50 per cent increase in interest, while similar ethnicity is 16.6 per cent more likely to result in a match. Ann Philipose, a Delhi-based therapist, has dealt with a number of couples who increasingly worry that their partner’s values, reflected through political beliefs, don’t align with their own. The digital dating panorama is marked with a young and extremely diverse demographic.

Apps such as Hinge, Bumble, Tinder and OKCupid were only launched in India in the last few years, and given the extreme variations in socio-economic strata, it is hard to collect empirical data. However, Taru Kapoor, India head, Tinder and the Match Group, told The Print that last year, on 6th September, when the Supreme Court read down Section 377 and decriminalised homosexuality, the App saw a huge swipe surge showcasing how impactful political decisions are. In a generation that is gravitating towards the notions of woke culture and political correctness, the political views of their partner becomes a deciding factor in the relationship. Events of the past few months, where dissent and the right to peaceful protests is being challenged across the Country, solidify the notion that a relationship between two people with contrasting politics is hard to get by. One also has to acknowledge the mental toll State-sponsored violence has taken on the people at the forefront of the movement. A student revealed the detrimental effects of brutality by Law and Order harmed their mental health to the extent they had to break up with their partner, because they couldn’t sustain and emotionally invest in a relationship in such troubled times.

Amidst all this, relationships can also be a safe space contributing to a worthwhile aspect of politics and dating, being able to communicate to your partner about the authoritarian elements of the regime, and transform their apolitical stance to one supporting those who are marginalised. And well, if this fairy tale like-incident doesn’t happen, you can break up with them, with Republic Day approaching; break their hearts on 26th January. Let the Constitution seep into your love life, finally.

Image Credits: Jaishree Kumar for DU Beat

Paridhi Puri

[email protected]

Keep Reading
By
DUB Speak

Saffron Politics: A Path To Majoritarianism

By

When the world’s biggest democracy drifts away from the path of Constitutional democracy to majoritarianism, it becomes important to understand the nuances that make it so dangerous.

India in the past few months, has been nothing less than a caged reign of terror and a saffron surge. The country has been riddled with internet shutdowns and police brutality; it becomes hard to compare it to any other democracy in the contemporary World. The ambiance has become one of fear, terror, and rampant Islamophobia. This Government-funded state of terror is evidently a result of a systematic shift in the country’s democratic structure which unfortunately for the Government in power, at this point, has become hard to miss.

Majoritarianism is a traditional political philosophy or agenda that asserts that a majority (sometimes categorised by religion, language, social class, or some other identifying factor) of the population is entitled to a certain degree of primacy in society, and has the right to make decisions that affect the society. On the contrary, India as a National State was made to be built on a constitutional democratic model- a democracy that takes into account the sentiments of not just the majority, but also of the minority.

Plato, when discussing democracy, asked the question of who should rule-that person being the wisest. But Karl Popper questioned that idea and talked of how this rule could turn into absolutism, where vested power turns tyrannical. It is then that popular vote becomes dangerous- after all, Perón and Hitler were voted into power democratically. Thus, democracy cannot imply that the vote of the majority is “an authoritative expression of what is right.”

A democratically elected Government of a secular state introduced a Bill that discriminated on the basis of religion, and endangered tribal cultural identity. A democratically elected Government of a Republic State gave national orders to oppress its citizens, took away the rights of citizens’ connectivity, and condoned police brutality. A democratically elected State is responsible for widespread Islamophobia throughout the nation, through a systematic way that it has managed to convince its citizens that it is in fact, not with an ideology of “eating the educated” and silencing its dissenters. It is this democratically elected Government that introduced a law comparable to Nazi Germany, where Nuremberg Laws and Reich Citizenship Laws declared who were eligible to be Reich citizens-with Jews being excluded.

It was a unanimous decision to make India a Secular, Socialist, Republic State, after the 42nd Amendment. The world’s longest written Constitution had days and months of discussion to safeguard its minorities. The National Government has passed several laws in recent years that have made life more difficult for religious minorities. India was never meant to be a Hindu homeland, they argue that it sits well with India’s ‘Humanitarian Values’. They argue that it helps safeguard minorities in Muslim majority countries but ignore India’s chequered history of refugee protection, and fail to recognise that the discriminatory nature of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, and the crackdown on dissent are signs of in-built minority persecution.

Already, countries like Canada and Australia are experiencing refugees from the ‘Hindu Rashtra’. International Law recognised persecution as a benchmark for asylum, and acceptance of these refugees from India should be a warning concern for us all. It is our duty and responsibility to safeguard the country’s minority- a country full of diversity and rich history. It is important to understand that the nation and the government are not synonymous, and to internalise it when Mark Twain said, “Loyalty to the nation all the time, loyalty to the Government when it deserves it.”

Featured Image Credits: Al Jazeera

Shreya Juyal

[email protected]

Keep Reading
By
Campus Central

Miranda House Hosts India Today’s Campus Face-off

By

On 17th January 2020, Miranda House hosted India Today’s Campus Face-off, which took a controversial turn after some students started protesting.

On 17th January 2020, India Today’s Rajdeep Sardesai and Aaj Tak’s Anjana Om Kashyap came to Miranda House for an edition of their show Campus Face-off. Campus Face-off is a special program where the anchors invite speakers from major parties, who debate and are questioned by the student audience. In Miranda House, they invited representatives from the three major parties of Delhi- Charu Pragya,  Bhartiya Janata Party (BJP), Radhika Khera, Indian National Congress (INC) and Atishi Marlena, Aam Aadmi Party (AAP).

The anchors, Mr. Rajdeep Sardesai and Ms. Anjana Om Kashyap, conducted an informal session for 30 minutes before the taping, while waiting for the representatives of the parties to arrive. The anchors were asked questions on the current political scenario. When asked about the pressure on media, Ms. Kashyap replied, “Everybody’s perception of how news is being presented is different. We’ve become a very politically polarized country right now.” Rajdeep Sardesai also used this time to promote his new book How Modi Won India in 2019.

While the debate was to be on the issue of “Women Safety, Judgement on Nirbhaya Case, and other issues” in the face of upcoming elections, the panelists also discussed various other issues too, such as Kashmir, the violence in student campuses, economy and unemployment, and the controversial Citizenship (Amendment) Act-National Register of Citizens (NRC).

Mid-taping, a group of students stood up in the top-left corner of the room, and started silently protesting by holding up posters questioning police brutality, CAA-NRC, internet shutdowns, state of Kashmir, and such ongoing issues. The protestors, who were silent initially, started chanting, “Shame, Shame, Shame” on a comment made by the BJP representative denying the existence of the NRC. When the protestors began sloganeering, Mr. Sardesai asked them to come to the podium, and express themselves. The students expressed their discomfort at the suggestion saying that they stood as a collective, and asking one of them to represent them all would make that representative vulnerable to being targeted.

The protestors then moved to the centre of the room, near the podium, and began sloganeering again. A Kashmiri student then took to the podium and addressed the crowd in a very emotionally charged speech. “Do you know what is AFSPA? What about it’s victims? We are raped. Understand this…  I am not against them (pointing to the panelists). I am against you all (pointing to the crowd). Shame on you… Fuck you. Fuck you sir. Fuck you three also.”

At this, Mr. Rajdeep Sardesai asked them to be removed from the taping, “Madam, you are allowed to speak your views, but you cannot hijack the program.” The Congress representative, then, came and stood with the protesting students.

“The face-off that took place yesterday at the Campus darkened the face of any form of dissent, dialogue, and debate that Miranda has known in the history of its existence. Yes, the anchors allowed questions, but what they also did was make the entire engagement futile…  In the midst of it all, what actually suffered a setback was the culture of radical politics that Miranda prides itself on. The complacency, privilege and comfortable applause of the audiences stood out. The very audience that shamed and policed the tones of the voices of dissent in Miranda, never once questioned the nature of the ongoing debate and their lack of discussion on issues of the marginalized communities. The ones that gathered spine enough to register their protest on a platform as major as this have been let down. The culture of Miranda hangs its head in shame and silence. To begin with, it never was inclusive and ‘woke’ enough to accommodate the marginalized,” said a statement released by the Instagram handle, @mh_studentscollective.


View this post on Instagram

What went wrong when India Today came to campus: A trajectory of events.

A post shared by Non-Starbucks kids of MH (@mh_studentscollective) on

Anshula, a student present at the taping, said “ Rajdeep Sir, according to me, handled it professionally and asked them to protest silently if they want to. He asked them not to hijack the mic, saying there were other people also waiting to raise their concerns. I, too, support the cause, but feel like they could have used the platform better. They raised valid concerns and questions which are important to all of us, but using foul language invalidates the cause.”

The taping went on for more than two hours and ended around six in the evening.

Feature Image Credits: DU Beat Archives

Satviki Sanjay

[email protected]

Keep Reading
By
Arts & Culture

Your Personal Dating Dictionary

By

Whether single or taken the new age dating lingo is an attraction to all of us. With many of us unaware of these new age terms we feel uncool in our gang of buddies, who discuss about their baes with millennial slang terms. Keeping this in mind we have hereby compiled a list of the uncommon, hip enough dating terms that will make you shine and grab the coolest place in your squad.

1. Nonversation– All the boring mainstream conversations on dating apps beginning from Introducing one another awkwardly and finally ending for a strange proposal for a video call are termed as nonversations. These banters lead to one common destination — nowhere.

2. Orbiting– Having an origin from the linguistic register of space research and astronomy makes this term even more ‘lit’. Just like the planets orbit around the sun the same way an orbiter despite of breaking all the contacts with you keeps hovering and orbiting around your social media. Whether commenting on your recent post or liking the picture you uploaded months back he or she does it all.

3. Layby – Tired of your present relationship? But, yet have not made it clear and are attempting to lay grounds for the girl or guy you want to date next ? This is what makes you a laybyer. Just like a person before leaving a current job gives interviews in new companies the same way a laybyer before breaking up starts investing in his or her future girl or guy. A complete ass isn’t it ?

4. Breadcrumbimg– This involves the category of people who texts and talks enough to make the other person fall for them but never follows through any plans or making any kind of commitments aka the whole loaf of bread. It is synonymous to the usage of ‘time pass’ for people.

5. Sunday night fever– this term is in reference with those young, lonely and single guys or girls who in an attempt to make their weekend interesting every sunday night flirt with dozens of people and propose them for a meet up. Such a pity !

6. Zombie-ing– When a wicked tries to enter your life usually after orbiting for a bit of time it is referred as zombieing. However, unlike actual zombies they even have a mask of humanity owing to which they begin their conversation with a ‘Hey’ followed by a ‘wassup’.

7. Dating down – When a person dates with someone inferior to him/her in terms of general attractiveness or intellect he or she is often said to be dating down. It is synonyms to the ironical usage of the quote ‘Love is blind’.

8. Fizzling – The cunning utilisation of the message technology to display ones lack or loss of interest in someone by responding inappropriately to a potential love message is called fizzling. This technique also saves one from the ugly and guts requiring face to face break up as the partner feeling undesired himself or herself starts maintaining a distance. Indeed a clever approach for a break up !

9. Megadating – This term is used In reference with a true dating pro who at a particular time juggles and has fun with a number of non-exclusive relationships and has a calendar booked with girls or guys.

10. Ghost– The act of abruptly ending all the conversations with someone special without giving any explanation or reasoning is called ghosting. Just like fizzling it’s an artful way of permanent separation from your spouse.

So, the next time your boyfriend or girlfriend messes with you, you know the appropriate word to describe your situation to your buddies. And if you are the sassy single, you can enjoy understanding and listening to the stories of your taken friends in their trendy lingo language.

Featured Image credits – Onlineprofilepros.com

Kriti Gupta

[email protected]

 

Keep Reading
By
Campus Central

Young India Unites Against CAA

By

On 20th January, 2020, Young India Coordination Committee called for Rally from Mandi House to Jantar Mantar, against Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA)-National Register of Citizens (NRC)-National Population Register (NPR), two days prior to Supreme Court’s hearing on the issue, along with All India Students’ Association (AISA), Krantikari Yuva Sangathan ( KYS ), Students’ Federation of India ( SFI ), All India Students’ Federation (AISF ) among others from Universties all over Delhi. 

20th January, 2020, observed a mass rally of students marching from Mandi House to Jantar Mantar at 1 p.m. against CAA-NRC-NPR. The rally was called for by Young India Coordination Committee along with multiple student organizations like AISA, KYS, SFI, AISF, Jawaharlal Nehru University Student’s Union (JNUSU), JCC, Joint Forum for Academic and Social Justice, Karwan-e-Mohabbat, Shaheen Bagh Protest Committee (United Youth Brigade), We the People among others.

Harsh Mandar, prominent Social Activist, said, “We are fighting against hatred with our love and Constitution. The Young India is showing us the hope and we will take back our India.”

Hundreds of students belonging to different universities like University of Delhi (DU), Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU), Jamia Millia Islamia (JMI) and other student organizations joined together to raise slogans of Azadi against the undemocratic and unsecular rule of the Government and against CAA-NRC-NPR.

They chanted slogans of “Inquilab Zindabad” (long live the revolution), “BJP hoshiyaar” (stay alert BJP), “Secularism Up-Up, Communalism Down-Down”, and sang popular songs improvised to create tunes of resistance. 

N Sai Balaji, National President, AISA, said, “Young India is one such powerful platform which not only unites all students and youth but today has shown that they won’t get divided by hate. But have unitedly launched a campaign to defend citizenship and defend the Constitution.” 

These protests are being held simultaneously in cities like  Mallapuram, Mumbai, Hyderabad, Delhi, Pune, Ahmedabad, Patna, Kolkata, Allahabad, Varanasi, and many others against CAA-NRC-NPR.

“Just after two days the Supreme Court is going to hear the petitions challenging CAA so by this rally and across the country we are trying to give this message that this march means a public declaration, that this public is not in support of CAA, specifically the students, the young people of this country. We are against this CAA. We are born in a secular and country and will not let them (the Government) destroy the secular fabric of this country. India cannot accept secularism on religious lines,” quoted Kawalpreet Kaur, Delhi President, AISA.

The rally was followed by talks addressed by prominent speakers such as Harsh Mander, Umar Khalid, Gauhar Raza and Professor Ratan Lal among others at Jantar Mantar.

Umar Khalid, popular youth Social Activist and former student of Jawaharlal Nehru University, told DU Beat, “Young India today wants jobs and education. It does not want divisive laws like CAA or NRC or NPR. When we demand education, what does the government tell us? That spending on education is a waste of taxpayer’s money. But our money is not gonna be spent on putting us through an exercise in which we will be forced to prove our citizenships. They are using our money to strip us of our rights and we cannot allow that to happen. The government does not have that right. The government is here to serve us, not lord over us. Citizens also have rights. We are demanding those rights-  right to education, right to employment, right to healthcare.”

Dipankar Bhattacharya, General Secretary Communist Party of Indi (ML), suggested that the country is fighting it’s second freedom struggle.

“This law has been brought to divide people based on their religion and if we allow them to do this, tomorrow it will lead to caste discrimination.” he further added.

Feature Image Credits: Gyanarjun Saroj for DU Beat

Aditi Gutgutia

[email protected]

Keep Reading
By
Auburn Umbrella

Dapper Winter Wardrobe Essentials For Men

By

Winter is a wonderful time of the year, though nippy. So, as the temperature falls, rather than bracing yourselves and turning into abominable snowmen burying yourself into deep and large bulky coats, style-less scarves and large gloves, its time you hone your vogue sense, but at the same ensure you don’t freeze yourself.

So here are some trendy and spruce must-have outfits which will literally help you kill two birds with one stone by keeping you warm in the chilly weather and at the same time enable you to keep your personal vogue up!

1) Leather Jacket-

A Leather Jacket is the most stylish, multifaceted, flexible clothing that every college going dude must possess! A leather jacket goes well with any and everything. It can be worn over a hoodie or with a T-shirt to give that casual and sleek look. Further, Leather Jackets are timeless since they can be worn for years if taken proper care of!

2) A Pair Of Dark- Wash Jeans-

Although plain, a pair of dark jeans are a staple without which no closet is complete! Jack up your outfit with a leather jacket, scarf, and boots or embellish it with a suit jacket. 

3) Woolen Overcoat-

A woolen overcoat is the perfect formal and dapper winter outfit that one can sport to look stylish and feel snug at the same time! Overcoats are available in a diverse range of colors ranging from navy to charcoal, etc and are sure to make you look bold and well- dressed.

4) Crew Neck Sweaters and Cardigans-

A crew neck sweater is essentially winter’s shirt. It has a smart appearance on its own, but can also be paired with a suit and pants or with jeans. The make of a crew neck is penny-plain and hence it would go well with a print or a bright color.

Cardigans, on the other hand, are a bit old- school and the latest ones maintain the classic look but with a modern edge. Style is something that one can modify with subtle additions and hence a cardigan can be kept modern by layering it with trendy tees or a mock neck shirt.

5) Flannel Shirt-

A flannel shirt is a perfect option for a casual and layered look. A wardrobe essential it compliments a legion of outfits! This goes well with a T-shirt and jeans for a relaxed look, or can be flaunted with a roll neck with a pair of chinos to enhance the vogue!

Featured Image Credits: Vaibhav Tekchandani for DU Beat

Abhinandan Kaul
[email protected]

Keep Reading
By
Arts & Culture

Bong Joon-Ho’s Parasite and The Class Divide

By

Though Bong Joon-Ho’s Korean cinematic masterpiece may have broken the glass ceiling of the Oscars with its nominations, it becomes important for another reason too- its acknowledgment of the class divide in the Asian community, and the reality of the rich and successful. 

Note: Spoilers below. Proceed with caution.

Bong Joon-Ho’s Parasite is making headlines with its numerous nominations at the Oscars, with the buzz of it becoming the first non-English language film to win the best picture. It’s perhaps hilariously ironic that Parasite is breaking the glass ceiling of the ‘White Academy Awards’ because it so beautifully weaves together a cinematic of just not ever breaking the glass ceiling of the wealth divide and the idea of an upstairs-downstairs life. 

Perhaps an upstairs-downstairs life is what Parasite showcases the best- the very existence of the ‘semi-basement’ in which the Kims live in suggests a feeling of denial that the poor man often feels; “it’s a semi-basement after all, and not a basement” as though the house exists in state of middle, being under the ground but not believing that it is. It reflects a feeling that everyone who is trying to make it big but doesn’t have the means to has: hope. 

The story opens with the Kim family hunting for WiFi while they fold pizza boxes, and letting the street fumigation disinfect their house from pests. None of them is employed, until the son, Kiwoo, bags a job at the Park residence tutoring their daughter. The Parks are the opposite of the Kim family- where the Kims live in a semi-basement apartment, the Parks have a huge, two-storey house with a garden. Their house represents what they are- over the ground, rich and successful- just like the Kims’ house represents what they are. The film proceeds with a montage of the Kim family taking over the Parks- Ki-Jung, the Kims’ daughter, becomes an art therapist to the Parks’ son, Chung-sook, the mother, becomes the housekeeper after they get rid of the Parks’ precious employee, and the father, Ki-Taek, becomes the Parks’ driver. It becomes a strange tug of war to feel bad for the Parks as the movie proceeds because the actions of the Kims are just that relatable, the Parks’ are just that ridiculously rich, and it is here that the question arises- what is a poor man exploiting a rich man exploiting a poor man? 

 

Later in the movie, it is revealed that the Parks’ home has a secret basement, and the Parks’ precious housekeeper, Mun-Kwang had been keeping her husband there secretly. It is here in the scene where Mun-Kwang begs the Kim mother to let her husband stay there and to help them out because they’re their “neighbours in need”, where you see the denial of the Kims at accepting that they’re the same as Mun-Kwang and her husband. Both the families are leeching off the Parks, and yet in two different ways. 

And yet still, this leeching is something that we’re sympathetic with because, throughout the entirety of the movie, we have seen Parks and their contribution to the class divide. It is in the way that Mr. Park thinks the Kim father smells- stinks– a certain way, the way all working-class people who take the subway smell. This distaste of Mr. Park is pointed out in various scenes with he acts towards the Kim father, and after he tells his wife of this ‘smell’, she also plugs her nose at him. This divide is seen in the way the two families interpreted the rains in the city- what devastated the Kims apartment and brought them and hundreds of other poor people out into the streets were showers to clear the sky for the Parks. Mr. Park doesn’t even let Mr. Kim feel upset about the devastating loss of all his belongings- to him, Mr. Kim should revel in the finery and celebrations of his son’s birthday, simply because he’s being paid. 

The party scene of the movie is important for very many reasons. The first is the death of Ki-Jung, Kim’s daughter who gets stabbed by Mun-Kwang’s husband. While she’s stabbed, the Parks’ young son gets traumatised and has a seizure, and all of the Parks’ friends run away. They all have big cars, and yet Mr. Park demands only Mr. Kim, whose daughter is bleeding to death in his arms, to give up the car keys and drive his son to the hospital. One may argue that it’s because he simply does not know that Ki-Jung is Mr. Kim’s daughter. But one has to wonder why it is the servant who gets the responsibility of driving the Parks during the emergency while their friends run away and another person lays dying in front of them. This scene is important also because of Mr. Park’s reaction to Mun-Kwang’s dead husband; while Mr. Park’s son is in pain due to his seizures and two people dead in front of him, his only concern while fishing out the key from under the dead body is the layman’s ‘smell’, which is perhaps why we’re not as horrified to see him die later. 

The penultimate shot of Parasite after Ki-woo vows to make enough money to buy the Park mansion and free his dad who is hiding in the secret basement is of Ki-woo hugging his father, as they stand in the garden, perhaps a symbolism of them finally being above ground, rich and successful. But then the movie ends with the camera panning down to the semi-basement where Ki-woo is still writing the letter. This ending is symbolic- everyone knows what the reality is. What Ki-woo wants will never happen, and it is in the end that we realise the real parasite was never the poor leeching off of the rich.

It was the hope leeching off of the poor. 

Featured Image Credits: IMDb

Shreya Juyal
[email protected] 

 

Keep Reading
By
Campus Central

I Am Offended: Sail Through the Censorship Debate

By

Both, Censorship and the Freedom of Speech require a delicate balance and immense intuitiveness. Many have argued on both sides, This piece aims to highlight what ideas stand out in this debate? 

Censorship refers to moderating the information and ideas that are disseminated in the society. After entering the web of the censorship debate, there is no escape. This fascinating, unsolvable mystery has questions that lead to more questions, gently treading the path between morality and legality. Everyone’s subjective notions of what is moral, acceptable, decent, and inoffensive are at interplay.

Now a question that would make Mr Pahlaj Nihalanijump onto his toes: Is censorship a good thing?

An infamous opinion piece, in the New York Times, ‘Free Speech Is Killing Us’, addressed the issue of noxious speech. Rebutting the idea of the Internet as a beacon of progress, it reminded the readers of the social media driven campaigns of Trumpand Duterte, the murder of Heather Heyer, the massacres in Pittsburg and Christchurch. “But what about speech that’s designed to drive a woman out of her workplace or to bully a teenage into suicide or to drive a democracy towards totalitarianism?” writer, Andrew Marantz, probed his readers.

Moving away from this, on another end of this spectrum there are moral policing and unnecessary restrictions being imposed. Banning of films representing the LGBTQ community, deletion of Twitters posts talking about casteism, unnecessary edits on several films by the former Chief of Sankar Board and being tagged as ‘anti-national’ for expressing dissent.

What such pieces necessitate are a need to draw lines around some content on the internet. But how easy is this task? Youtube’s ban on violent content resulted in reportage of the Syrian war being take down, Twitter’s rules about sexual content led to information on sexual health also being removed. Regulations can, therefore, close doors on several avenues to spread awareness.

A move criticised for its timing right before the General Elections, stricter social media regulations were put in place. The authorities claimed this was done to curb misinformation. This would require content deemed as “unlawful” by government will have to be erased from Facebook, Google, TikTokand other platforms. WhatsAppwill be required to decrypt encrypted data, to trace it to its original sender. Netflix, Hotstarand seven other platforms have begun self-regulation in attempts to avoid censorship. This played in favour of, our favourite mota bhai, Mr Mukesh Ambani, for obvious reasons.

Stringent censorship can be found in countries like China, Saudi Arabia and Russia. With more than 150 days of internet shutdown in Kashmir, how long before we enter the list?

Journalism, as an independent and impartial body, is not meant to serve the establishment. Its duty is to question, educate and be the voice of people. It was not birthed to be controlled. A democracy seizes to exist when its journalists, activists and reporters begin to live in fear. The ABP row and stepping down of two leading journalists demonstrated the heights of control over the press. The gruesome violence at the satirical weekly Charlie Hebdo was also a dark day in the history of the press.

Free speech is an inextricable part and the cornerstone of a democracy. Dissent cannot be suppressed under the garb of censorship, because with changing times, the youth refuses to settle and rather demands what’s better. The New York Times piece warns against absolutism and how it cannot be used as an opt out from harassment. It is a right to be exercised with full responsibility. Use of force cannot be a medium to extinguish protests and silence voices of people.

Going back to the dilemma we started with, one’s morality emerges from their upbringing, culture, values, and education. The same rules cannot hold true for all, which makes censorship an endless debate. While morality is where we use our discretion, the higher authorities have the onus of the legalities of it.

Feature Image Credits: Debate.Org

Shivani Dadhwal

[email protected]

Keep Reading
By