the false benevolence of the law and its corruption

14.05.2026

In the Mardaani 3 film, the villains are Amma which means ‘Mother’ and her son. The female cop pits herself against the identity of The Mother, the poor woman.

Or does she?

There is a curious mirroring between The Mother and the female cop (The Law). Amma criticises the law by saying it serves the rich, not the poor girls. The female cop criticises the law for serving the rich and not the poor girls. Amma uses a certain strategy with her son to infiltrate the law. The female cop copies her strategy to infilitrate Amma’s criminal network.

The female cop also uses the body of Amma as a weapon, as the solution to resolving all of the issues in the case. She exploits the mother son bond and the figure of the poor woman Mother. In the movie, there is also the invocation of the Mother figure of power for the female cop as a puppet show is depicted in which Durga The Mother Queen, the Mother goddess fights against her enemies.

At the same time that the movie is hostile to the poor Mother and depicts her as a criminal that exploits poor girls, the film is trying to reclaim her body and position for the law. It is copying the poor mother as the source of real legitimacy. This is because the film is going against the traditional culture of India which is to celebrate the poor mother as the source of legitimacy and authority. Ask me, I am named after it, the son that weds Mother India in the movie of the name with the poor Mother in it. There is this false face of benevolence to the law because the female cop is supposedly trying to help the poor girl, she is supposedly good.

But the law is not good. It is trying to destroy the power and the legitimacy of the poor Mother. It is trying to destroy the Mother/Son bond of protection and love in the movie. While no one is justifying child trafficking or any of the villainous aspects of the villains in the movie, it is worthwhile noting how they attempt to demonise the poor Mother. Amma is supposed to be attacking and killing poor girls, which is actually what the female cop is doing because she kills and silences Amma in the movie by shooting her in the throat, suppressing and marginalising the voice of the poor Mother. She does the same to the son that loves the poor Mother. Amma is supposed to be exploiting the bodies of poor girls, but who else does this? It is the female cop by exploiting Amma’s body as a weapon.

The law is falsely benevolent and it is corrupt. The fact is that the female cop acts for and with the rich and powerful Father of the rich girl. Against the poor Mother.

The Rise of the Anti-Mother and Anti-Son Film and Western Law

13.05.2026

SPOILER ALERTS

Coming from a society that worships The Mother, where the duty is to be the son and lover of The Mother, I have written before about how the traditional Indian film has protested against the sexual repression of the West and its law which is based on an Asian Mother phobia. This phobia of the Asian mother reveals that The Mother is the Other to Western law, which is misogynistic and fears maternal or feminine authority. https://cafedissensus.wordpress.com/2022/05/30/there-is-no-bad-mother-beta-and-the-indian-mother-law-against-the-wests-asian-mother-phobia/ 

More and more, as I watch current films and watch current movies, I am learning just how far this misogyny and phobia of the mother goes in Western culture, or its unconscious legal culture. I am currently reading the Skandar the Unicorn books. The author worked in the law. Guess who is the villain in the first two books (I have only just begun the second one)? It is The Mother.

I watched ‘Polite Society’ the other day. Aside from the usual racism in these films about British Asian people – i.e. the British Asian man can never get married in these films because ‘there is something wrong with him’, guess who was the villain? It was The Mother. And the film spent all of its time making the mother/son bond loathsome as well through the eyes of the spoilt and Westernised British Asian female in it that seemed to hate the culture of the older generation.

Today I watched ‘Mardaani 3’, a cop film. Guess who was the villain? You guessed it. The character that was named ‘Amma’, or The Mother. And guess what? The Asian man in the film was also a villain because of the maternal relationship between himself and The Mother.

Mardaani 3 is worth analysing. The Mother comes from a poor family and has a Haryanvi dialect accent which suggests the rural. While no one is saying that she is a good character, because she is a child trafficker, the point is how the law in the form of the film’s heroine finishes her. She is shot in the throat. And then, when she can’t answer back, and the law has silenced the voice of this poor woman, the heroine of the film gives a big monologue. Same with the son. He comes from the poor. And he is also silenced when he is finished. The whole point of these films is to silence the poor Mother and the son that loves her and protects her.

Why am I talking about Indian films alongside British Asian films and British Literature? Because India was colonised and Western law was forced on us. This misogyny comes from the West. However, there are still sons that come from poor mothers. I am one of them. We will not accept this misogyny because we have sworn to protect our mothers. I represent the Indian national movement. I was named after the son that married Mother India. Against the hatred of The Mother and this legal culture, we stand for dharma, the organic law of India. I have modelled myself on my mother, the poor, foreign woman. The poor Indian woman. I am her voice. Even when the whole of this Western culture and its law is against us, wants to silence us. Because as I have written before, the dharma is the Mother-Law. We will never stop worshipping The Mother. Just like The Dark Mother stood as a symbol of Revolution against the Imperialists, so we still stand. We are the rivals of the oppressions and injustices of the Western law, its marginalisations and suppressions. Jai Maa Kaali!

fake friends and demob happiness

06.05.2026

S: You know, Alfonso, you are a real friend. You are always reliable. There are no wires crossed with you. It is always comfortable talking to you.

A: Is this a buttering up?

S: Not at all. I am comparing you to fake friends. A fake friend is not dependable. There are always wires crossed with a fake friend. And, eventually if not at first, it is uncomfortable talking to a fake friend.

A: Don’t let these fake friends bother you. They don’t care about you. Don’t care about them either.

S: Because I don’t lie, I don’t expect others to lie to me. To pretend that they are friends. I just can’t believe what users these fake friends are. You help them. You give them presents. You look after them and listen to their troubles. And in the end? They betray you.

A: They are not worth your spit. I don’t know why you worry so much about their betrayals and the fact that they are users. You have seen what they are like. Why be upset about them after that? They are not worth it. You are too good for them.

S: A big heart hurts big time.

A: Harbour your emotions and your investment for those that are worthy of it. You have been told by people that love you that you love too freely. You accept friendship too freely. Learn that they have to prove themselves. You cannot trust others.

S: So you yourself are telling me that you cannot trust other people?

A: Trust is earned. Sadly you have seen what this society produces. There are not worthy and honourable people now.

S: Well let us forget these fake friends the same way that they have forgotten us.

A: Tell me about your day.

S: I went to visit the V and A East. I did the upper ground floor. I went to the gym and pushed some heavy weights and did running on the treadmill, so fast that I went dizzy at the end of it. I shopped at M & S and bought some beef udon noodles for lunch as well as some reduced price Cadbury’s Creme eggs at Tesco’s and reduced price chicken and sweetcorn sandwiches to take around with me tomorrow. I finished the first draft of my dissertation for my Art History degree. So I will take a day off tomorrow before I revise it. I went to the park and smelled the scent of the flowers, watched the work of the bees at the flowers, communicated with nature and admired the flight of the birds. Dinner was chicken biryani, one of my favourite dishes that my mother makes.

A: A good day, forget about the troubles. Live life. It is fuller than theirs.

Dr. Suneel Mehmi: Academic Summary

Suneel Mehmi is a British independent scholar whose work moves across English literature, film, and law, and is grounded in the interdisciplinary field of law and literature. What distinguishes his scholarship is a sustained attempt to uncover what he conceptualises as the legal unconscious: the hidden structures—psychological as much as cultural—through which law shapes how meaning is produced, authority is recognised, and subjects are formed. Drawing on both legal theory and psychoanalytic thought, Mehmi approaches interpretation not as a neutral act, but as a site where power is internalised, repeated, and sometimes resisted.

His academic training in both law and literature informs a method that is at once theoretically rigorous and critically flexible. Across his work, Mehmi returns to a central concern: that the authority of law depends not only on institutions, but on the ways individuals come to feel that authority as natural, necessary, and even desirable. It is in this affective and unconscious dimension that his work is most distinctive.

This concern is developed in his monograph, Law, Literature and the Power of Reading: Literalism and Photography in the Nineteenth Century (2021), where Mehmi revisits the debate around “literal” and “critical” reading. Rather than simply rejecting literalism, he interrogates the criticism of literalism, showing how so-called idealist or critical readings can reproduce their own forms of interpretive authority. What appears to be a move toward freedom—reading beyond the surface—can become another way of regulating meaning and privileging certain readers. In this sense, both literal and anti-literal approaches participate in a deeper structure of control. Photography, as it appears in nineteenth-century literature, disrupts this dynamic by introducing a visual logic that resists both forms of reading, pointing to the limits of interpretation itself.

Mehmi’s psychoanalytic orientation becomes especially pronounced in his work on film and literature, where he explores how legal authority is internalised at the level of desire, fear, and fantasy. In his reading of the Hindi film Beta (1992), he develops a striking account of what he terms a Western “Asian mother phobia.” Here, psychoanalysis becomes a tool for understanding cultural difference: while Western frameworks often cast the powerful mother as a source of anxiety or excess, Indian legal and cultural traditions can position her as a legitimate and central figure of authority.

In Beta, the maternal figure operates not only as a social authority but as an unconscious one. Her power is sustained through emotional bonds, guilt, and identification—mechanisms that psychoanalysis helps to bring into focus. Mehmi shows how the film stages a complex drama of attachment and control, in which obedience is not simply imposed but desired. The mother’s authority is thus both juridical and psychic, revealing how law can be internalised as part of the subject’s own structure of feeling. The apparent stability of this authority, however, is shadowed by tension, suggesting the fragility of the very order it sustains.

A similarly psychoanalytic sensitivity informs Mehmi’s readings of the work of Roald Dahl. In Dahl’s fiction, Mehmi identifies a world structured by violence, punishment, and exaggerated authority figures, where the child is positioned in relation to often grotesque forms of adult power. Rather than reading these elements simply as moral fantasy or dark humour, Mehmi treats them as expressions of deeper unconscious dynamics. Authority in Dahl’s work is at once feared and desired, resisted and reproduced—mirroring the ambivalence that psychoanalysis locates at the heart of subject formation.

Through this lens, Dahl’s stories become more than children’s literature; they are sites where the legal unconscious is vividly staged. The stark divisions between good and bad, justice and injustice, reveal an underlying struggle over how authority is recognised and legitimised. Mehmi’s readings show how these narratives both challenge and reaffirm structures of control, allowing readers to imaginatively confront—and yet remain within—the frameworks that govern them.

Mehmi’s work on race and gender, particularly in his analysis of Annihilation (2018), further extends this psychoanalytic approach. There, he explores how difference is managed through processes that are at once spatial, visual, and unconscious, revealing how law-like structures regulate what is perceived as other or threatening.

Alongside these major interventions, his contributions to venues such as the Literary London Journal explore how urban space itself can be “read” through similar dynamics, shaped by unseen norms that organise belonging, exclusion, and movement within the city.

Across all of Mehmi’s work—including studies of Henry James—a consistent insight emerges: that law operates not only through rules, but through the unconscious life of interpretation. By bringing psychoanalysis into dialogue with law and literature, Mehmi reveals how authority is not simply imposed from outside, but lived from within—felt, imagined, and reproduced in the very act of making meaning.

living with profound despair

04.05.2026

S: I woke up again from another nightmare in the supermarket, the supermarketisation of art and culture, the meanness of the philistines in this world. And as I lay in bed thinking over things, this is what came into my head. There is this line in this movie ‘Gadar’ (Rebellion/Mutiny/Revolt) that I think about over and over again.

A: The film goer. Which is?

S: Let me tell you the story of this film. It is based on a true story. A Sikh man fell in love with a Muslim woman. He married her and had children with her. The partition separated them. Her parents broke up the marriage. He committed suicide.

A: He kills himself?

S: In real life. In the movie, he does not kill himself. He wins her back.

A: So, tell me this line that you obsessively return to.

S: The scene in the film is that the two lovers are going to be separated. They have only just fallen in love. They are talking. He is suffering from the pain of separation already. And he says to her, ‘No matter how merciless this life is, you still have to live it.’

A: This is the line that you think about? There is no elegance or poetry to it.

S: Is it not the whole message of the film? The whole point of the film? In the film, he is to live. Whereas in this brutal and merciless world, he is made to die through its hostility to love and diversity, to an interfaith marriage, to the embrace of difference, to harmony and unity across cultures. In the film he is given his happiness.

A: You love the fairy tale even knowing the reality.

S: You live for your ideals. The ideals of India are the embrace of difference. The actor in the film, Sunny Deol, he is me. I have modelled myself upon the hero of Punjab.

A: It is easier said than done to live through despair.

S: When you are the hero, your duty is to live. In this spiritual war, it is our duty to not only survive but to prosper. Even when you dream of death, you make plans to live. Because we are love. And we keep love alive in this mean and cheap world.

A: You that has nightmares every night, you that has separated yourself from every community, you preach love and life?

S: To stomach injustice is to become unjust. To live with those that cheapen life is not life. To live with those that devalue love, that is not life. It takes courage to separate yourself from communities for the ideals of love and life. I have that courage. I can stand all alone in this world. I have lived through profound despair. And despite everything, still I laugh. I make a life. I love. I was born to be a hero. It is what I am named after, this Sikh hero Sunil Dutt that married a Muslim woman and saved her life, just like in the film Gadar. She is Mother India and I was raised to protect her honour. The story of Gadar is the story of my life. Why? Because I am Punjab. I am India. And this film that we are talking about? It is the most watched film in modern Indian history. All of India loves me. Because I am India. I am Punjab. I am The Tiger. I am love.

reluctance to write

A: I notice that you are reluctant to write at the moment.

S: One wonders where it goes. One wonders what it does. One wonders, in short, why?

A: You have your readers.

S: Enemies and critics.

A: You have something to say.

S: Which no one wants to listen to.

A: You are The Tiger.

S: The mortal enemy of this world.

A: You cannot stop writing. They expect. They read you every day in every way.

S: There is only one reason why I write. So that they cannot defeat me. Defeat us. The Oppressed. This learning, it is for The Oppressed. This mind, it is for The Oppressed. This body? It belongs to The Oppressed.

A: Why can you not just live for yourself?

S: I am The Oppressed. I am The Mother. It is the authentic self. There is nothing other.

A: Write then for them.

S: Have you ever considered the language of the warrior?

A: What do you mean?

S: The words of a fighter are charged with energy, absolute energy. It is the fight. The pen is not mightier than the sword. The pen itself is the sword.

A: Language as a weapon?

S: Language as the fist. Language as the kick. Language as the choke hold. The mastery over the language is the mastery over the martial arts.

A: Who has taught you this?

S: The gurus. The activists. The scholars. Hindi film. They have made the writer into the warrior. And the duty of the warrior? Even when he is cut into pieces, he will fight. Even when all else have been defeated and he stands as the last man on the battlefield, he will fight. Fighting is what he was born and raised to do. It is his life. And so, he fights. He writes.

A: With reluctance?

S: The war is hard. Life is hard. Yes, with reluctance. But still he writes. Because he believes in that one spark that will light up this world. That precious one, that precious reader that will become The Tiger too. What The Oppressed pray for, what The Mother desires. Freedom.

the expression of energy

22.04.2026

A: What did and do your university tutors make of your writing?

S: They said that I was original, ambitious. They said that I went far. They said that my writing was lively.

A: What do they mean by lively?

S: After all, my writing is the expression of energy. Of total power. Of a mind that is free and does not fear. Because this is what the power of the mind is.

A: Where does this energy come from?

S: That is the question, is it not? First of all, I have always had high levels of energy. Then, we were not kept idle as children. We had many things to do. Add to that that I have always done much exercise to build up this body and mind. Do not forget the genes of the athlete and the scholar that my grandfather has bequeathed me. And do not forget the discipline that I have. Discipline is everything.

A: This energy that you have has been described by everyone around you as unnatural.

S: I am a genius. Although I come from nature I am beyond nature.

A: Is this energy that you have being translated? Is this energy being expressed?

S: There are so many pies that I have fingers in. I do the work of three men. Is that not enough?

A: Why not sit and redraft this book that you say proves that you are a genius? You keep on saying that you will do it and you have not touched it.

S: I will not kill myself to do it. They will not give me any reward for it. They are ungrateful, miserly and haters in their hearts. They are unfair and they do not reward or recognise on merit. They do not even deserve my genius. If I write this book, it will only be for us, The Oppressed.

A: The reluctance of genius.

S: All my life, I have worked for society. And what have I got for it for myself? It is a serious question.

A: But now you have everything you wanted. Meaningful work and a girlfriend. You have got something out of it.

S: Where is my honour?

A: Come come. There are many that respect you. You do have honour as well. Write the book. Prove that you are the genius that you say that you are.

S: Summer is almost here. There is only one more month. Then we will see what this energy can do.

A: Forget that you are Achilles sulking and become the greatest of the warriors. You know how important that argument is in the book. You know that you are the king of reading and the king of letters. Show the splendour of Punjab. Show them the roar of The Tiger. Show them the champion of The Oppressed.

the inimitability of the tiger

14.04.2026

Alfonso and I, we had both been to visit a friend again in the hospital. I had rushed there after work while completing several urgent errands on the way. We had spent about an hour with him, cheering him up and asking him how things were over there. Afterwards, Alfonso had taken me to his home and cooked me up beef enchaladas with a salad and sour cream. Then we had watched Sting performing on the television set in the bygone era.

I had been telling Alfonso of the useless attempts of an Ai system to duplicate my written efforts. ‘Did you know,’ I asked him, ‘that Dickens used to call himself the inimitable. And, certainly, according to the experiments today, The Tiger himself is also inimitable.’

‘What makes you think so?’

‘Well, I asked this Ai system to replicate my style. I typed in my name and told it to do it. To create a new story based on the way that I write.’

‘What were the results?’ asked Alfonso with a mockery of gravity.

‘The story was absolutely atrocious. It was about a pigeon watching me while the state created a duplicate identity of me and informed me of it by post.’

‘Ill-written?’

‘Precisely. There was not the least touch of my style or the sound of my mind. Basically, this Ai system had concocted a mixture of Kafka and Poe’s Raven, because that is what it understood my style to be. Not only that, but there had been an attempt at a philosophical conversation. I say an attempt because there was certainly no depth or original thinking involved at all.’

‘And how did this make you feel, watching the Ai perform you so badly? Were you reassured of your idiosyncracy and capriciousness?’

‘It certainly let me know that I was not a mindless and meaningless computer, a hunk of metal and minerals. It certainly let me know that this style that has developed through genius and a lifetime of suffering and practice cannot be so easily acquired.’

‘Do you think a mortal could write like you do?’

‘Of course they could not. Genius, although it is imitated, is always in the last analysis inimitable. I am sure that plenty will try to become The Tiger. However, as in the movie, there is is only one.’

what the genius writes

14.04.2026

A: So you have this claim, that you are a genius.

S: It is not a claim. It is a reality.

A: What then does the genius write?

S: Everything.

A: Come come. A little clarification. What differentiates your writing from that of others?

S: I see what no one else can see.

A: A claim for originality.

S: And then, the genius writes to shock, amaze, astound and confound. Contrarily to the herd who write to reassure, who write complacently about their herd mentality and all of the evils therein. Who write to soothe the conscience of the oppressors, to justify this tyrannical and inquitious world.

A: You claim awe?

S: Indeed, I claim awe. The genius shakes the foundations of this world.

A: If you are indeed a genius, where is the recognition?

S: Does genius ever get recognition in this world? The time of Da Vinci has been replaced with the time of cretins like Musk and Trump. Of social media influencers whose sole task is to peddle cosmetics and a pampered lifestyle. What can you expect of these people? They could not recognise their own arse in the dark. Let alone genius. All they see is the foreign name and the colour of the skin. That is what they judge upon. Not the argument. Not the reasoning. Not the writing. With the exception of the genuinely intelligent. Because however moronic society becomes, the genuinely intelligent do recognise talent. Unfortunately, they have no power to nurture it. Because the power? It belongs to the morons. And this is why I am a genius. Because I was born into powerlessness because of my caste, my working class origin, and my skin and culture. I was not born as a moron. We can see.

A: What is the use of genius if it does nothing?

S: Mother India has a saying. That in the end, only truth alone will triumph. Satyameva Jayate. It is a phrase that is thousands of years old. I am the truth. I am the truth. I am the truth that no one wants to see or to hear. I am truth that is thousands of years old that they cannot even see. Only I can see it. I am blessed because The Mother has placed her hand above my head. I am invincible. That is why I am a genius. They cannot think like me. I am the last generalist in an era of narrow specialisation. I can crack the codes, the meanings of the self. That is why I am a genius.

A: And, you have the ego.

S: Yes. I go for the jugular vein. The most important work falls to me because I have the ego for it. That is why I am a genius.

A: Either you have the delusion of grandeur. Or you are a charlatan. Or, you are in fact, a genius.

S: I know what you will conclude. It is a mixture of all three.

you or me

13.04.2026

S: It comes down to you or me.

A: What does?

S: The fight. Either we can be destroyed. Or them.

A: Why can you not live with difference?

S: We can. But they have decided to eliminate difference. And therefore, it becomes us against them. You or me. And I choose me. I choose difference.

A: You will not accept destruction?

S: Six thousand years of the reign of The Tiger. That is what we are talking about. The loss to the world if we were gone would be immense. Selfishness and greed would choke this world. There would be no love left in the universe. There would be no men left. You would accept the destruction of all that is good in this world? The counter to oppression is freedom. The counter to tyranny and the narrow mind is the limitless.

A: How do you know that they are not right about you? That you are toxic?

S: If a real man is regarded as toxic, then the non-toxic is nothing good.

A: They see you as outdated.

S: They are a petty interruption to the larger history of man. Their opinion is of no consequence.

A: They hold the reins. They have the power.

S: That is not true. Only the warrior holds the power. We shape the world according to our will.

A: How do you know that you are the warrior?

S: This fight, this hard and long fight, I have been fighting it my whole adult life. We will never bend. We will never kneel. If to be us is sin, then we are sinners. If loving The Mother is a test, then we will past the test. We remain undefeated. However much they hate us, we survive. We prosper despite their hate. This territory, it is ours.

A: They say that an enemy knows an enemy.

S: What they should know is that I live for revenge.

A: What is this revenge?

S: In our culture, revenge is what transforms this world. My blood is in this world. They are our future. And for them, and for the ones that come after them, they cannot be subjected to what I was subjected to. I love them too much for that. The revenge is success. We will force our success down their throats. We will hold the reins.

A: How is your revenge going?

S: I am prosperous. My name and my writing is everywhere. I am already a role model. I have achieved what other people only dream of. I have five degrees and a doctorate. I am a doctor. A published author. A published poet. A published photographer. A published artist. I am the pride of Punjab.

A: Yet you are not satisfied with your revenge.

S: The older an enmity, the more dangerous it becomes. This is a line from a Hindi film. Yes, I am still not satisfied. The success has not choked them yet.