We want LI to be one of the friendliest places on the internet, where lawyers and law students help each other with their career related queries and occasionally discuss other stuff that might affect their lives too. In other words:
1. Be kind, respectful and helpful to each other.
2. Be bona fide, truthful, genuine and curious.
3. Assume the best intention of others.
Therefore, in using the site, you must agree to do your best to uphold these community guidelines.
Note that what you find here is written and moderated by anonymous people on the internet.
Therefore everything you read here is very likely unverified, rumour, speculation and/or downright false.
In continuing to read anything here, you must therefore agree not to take anything you read here as factual and that you will exercise due caution, diligence and common sense before acting on any information you may come across here.
You also agree to report any inaccurate or malicious comments with the buttons. Moderators take action within 24 hours, as required and appropriate under law.
Our full terms and conditions apply too.
Do you solemnly agree to all of the above?
In this context consider whether the following fictional movies, even if they were 'based on a true story' or whatever, should be celebrated or rightly described as propaganda:
- a Russian film about the Ukranian neo-Nazi Azad militia force, brutally murdering a resident of Crimea, set some time around 2019.
- a Chinese film depicting a Tibetan or Uyghur terrorist plot to overthrow the Chinese government,
- a US American film about how torture at Guantanomo Bay saves the lives of millions of Americans by foiling an evil terrorist plot (though that one probably exists, even if only in the garb of Kiefer Sutherland's 24 or the like)
- a Myanmar film showing how a Rohingya man murders an honest-hard-working Buddhist and gets away with it.
Throughout 20th century history, movies and propaganda have gone hand in hand, starting perhaps most famously with Nazi and Soviet film-making, and often such propaganda (much like Putin's pretext for invading Ukraine) has as its aim to establish the victimhood of a peoples (whether that be ethnic Russians oppressed by West and Ukranian Nazis). And as those masters of propaganda would have taught, all the best propaganda is based on kernels of truth or things that people already believe.
This is not to diminish or deny that also Hindus have historically also suffered in Kashmir. But the timing and one-sidedness of the Kashmir Files movie, judging by every description read, seems to put it squarely in propaganda territory to justify the government's actions in Kashmir rather than being a 'documentary' or innocent work of fiction or entertainment or 'setting the record straight'.