Privilege: The Power to Ignore

Privilege is often portrayed as nothing more than the reward of hard work, as though the world were an equal playing field and every person had the same road to walk. It is easy to glorify someone’s success as effort alone, when the doors they walked through were already open, when the ground they stood on was already steady, when the space around them was already made safe by the others.

To say that privilege is merely about choice is to insult those who never had one. It is to look at the person who never got a stage and tell them they should have performed better, to look at the child locked out of classrooms and say they should have studied harder. This is not truth but is arrogance, and it keeps power in the hands of those who already have it.

The cruelty of privilege is not just in what it gives but in what it denies. It creates a blindness that makes people mock struggles they have never endured, it allows them to reject pain that has never crossed their doorstep, it makes them believe that fairness has already been achieved simply because they themselves were never forced to fight for it. In this way privilege does not just protect the fortunate, it also silences the less fortunate, stripping their suffering of legitimacy while celebrating someone else’s advantage as destiny.

What makes privilege most dangerous is not the comfort it provides, but the indifference it breeds. Once someone convinces themselves that their rise was only about their own effort, they begin to see the suffering of others as weakness, they begin to believe inequality is natural, they begin to defend a system that was never fair to begin with. And when a society normalises that mindset it raises generations who mistake opportunism for merit and selfishness for strength.

Privilege survives through excuses and denial. It convinces people that what they hold was rightfully earned and that others simply did not try hard enough. In that point of arrogance, the pain of those who were never given the same ground to stand on is ignored as nothing and their struggle is treated as failure.

Madharaasi Review

Madharaasi is a 2025 Tamil action drama directed by AR Murugadoss featuring Siva Karthikeyan in the lead role with Vidhyut Jamwal, Rukmini Vasanth, Biju Menon, Shabeer Kallarakkal and others playing crucial parts. And music composed by Anirudh Ravichander. The film had fairly high expectations as it was considered the return of Murugadoss after a gap, and audiences were eager to see if the filmmaker still retained his signature touch of making action packed commercial cinema, that could also hold depth.

The plot in itself is not something extraordinary as it revolves around an effort to suppress gun culture in the city. What adds a slight twist is that the protagonist suffers from delusion disorder which shapes his perception of reality. Alongside this we see a romantic track and some emotional elements layered over the action. While the core of the story is not fresh it is the execution and writing that keeps it engaging. The first half moves at a racy pace that barely allows you to breathe while the second half slows down considerably, though never to the point of losing interest.

A crucial aspect that strengthens the writing is the flashback portion which explains why this delusion syndrome affects the hero. Unlike the exaggerated and unnecessary fake flashback sequences that have become common in many recent films, this one runs barely two or three minutes yet conveys an emotion that is genuine. It adds a layer of authenticity to the character and avoids the artificial melodrama that often drags down commercial cinema.

Murugadoss once again proves that writing and screenplay are often greater strengths than novelty of the plot. The screenplay is done with care and the placement of scenes works effectively to maintain rhythm. He is one of the few directors who is not lazy to write his film in a conventional yet effective way and this is evident throughout Madharaasi. Unlike some filmmakers who attempt to project themselves as the Nolan of the industry, Murugadoss remains a genuine writer and director who works with conventional templates and still delivers them with conviction. Many directors today walk in with stronger stories but fail in execution while Murugadoss on the other hand elevates a simple story into something that looks powerful. The film shows what proper structuring can do to even a familiar premise.

Technically Madharaasi is stunning. The cinematography and stunts are mounted on a scale that Tamil cinema rarely sees. There is a truck sequence where a massive collision plays out with cars being smashed and tossed, which feels as authentic and dynamic as any Hollywood action set piece. The impact is heightened further by the excellent sound design which captures every blast every shatter and every fall with a punch. Special credit must be given to Vidhyut Jamwal whose physicality and stunt work raise the bar as always but the real surprise comes from Siva Karthikeyan who for the first time convincingly matches Vidhyut’s physical intensity. The choice to rely on practical stunts and real explosions rather than overused green screen graphics makes the film feel raw and immersive. In terms of visual impact this is a five on five effort.

Anirudh Ravichander’s music adds another strong layer. While the songs follow the standard Tamil cinema template of an introduction track, a love song and a few situational numbers the treatment makes them fit seamlessly into the narrative. More importantly the background score plays an integral role in shaping the emotional and action scenes of the film. The pairing of action cinematography with a balanced sound design gives Madharaasi, a level of authenticity that makes you feel inside the world rather than watching from outside.

In the acting department every major performer contributes effectively. Shabeer Kallarakkal as Chirag is a standout who brings intensity and unpredictability to his character. Vidhyut Jamwal as Virat provides a powerful antagonist whose presence makes the stakes feel genuine, because when a villain feels untouchable the fear of what might happen if he breaks free becomes real. Siva Karthikeyan carries both strengths and weaknesses of his familiar persona. There are moments of his typical comic body language that feel repetitive but he also delivers in areas we rarely expect from him, especially in a brutal pre climax fight sequence that strips away the image of a soft entertainer and replaces it with a rawer more intense side. His portrayal of a man with delusion disorder is not flawless but is strong enough to leave an impact.

The film is not without shortcomings. The second half does fall with stretches that feel extended as though the narrative was fully resolved in the first half but required to be dragged further. Yet Murugadoss manages to cover most of these flaws through his screenplay which keeps the proceedings alive. Despite dips in momentum Madharaasi never collapses into dullness.

Overall Madharaasi stands as a significant return for AR Murugadoss. It may not boast of a groundbreaking story but the writing, execution, stunts, visuals, music and performances make it a complete cinematic experience. It is not flawless but it is undoubtedly a film worth watching at least once. 

(What truly stands out here is not that Murugadoss reinvented anything but that he showed the audience of what honest writing can do. At a time when many Tamil directors speak like philosophers yet fail to translate their words into meaningful cinema, Murugadoss shows that films do not need self glorification they need sincere effort. He proves once again that he is a writer first and a director next and more importantly he is one who refuses to be lazy with his writing.)

Rating: 7/10⭐️ 

A Privilege We Never Notice

I recently noticed something that seemed insignificant at first. My sister caught a cold. It was in middle of a hot season. While she struggled with sneezes and a heavy head, I sat comfortably eating ice cream without a trace of discomfort. That small contrast made me realise how privileged I am in ways I had never considered before.

For me a cold is rare. My body resists it and allows me to enjoy food, weather and simple moments. But for her and for many others, life is shaped by the limits their body places on them. Imagine living in a cycle where a slight shift in weather or a small indulgence in food immediately punishes you with hours or days of unease. Carrying tissues everywhere, skipping outings because the body refuses to cooperate, avoiding what you like to eat because you know it will only make you sick again.

When you look closely, a cold is no longer just a cold. It shows how fragile human experience can be and how unevenly it is distributed. We often associate privilege with money, opportunity or social position, yet good health is a form of privilege that we rarely acknowledge. The ability to walk out in rain, eat what you like, or sit under a fan without worrying about reactions is something many cannot do. Health divides people and also it decides the quality of life more than we admit.

This also makes me think about how casually we ignore sickness. We tell people to be strong, to get over it, to stop making a fuss. while on the other hand we enjoy the luxury of resilience that was simply handed to us by genetics or chance. We do not earn this immunity, yet we treat those without it as though they are lacking, and that is the deepest irony.

Health often goes unnoticed until it begins to slip away. A human body free from constant discomfort is not just normalcy, it is wealth. If something as minor as a cold can shift our entire mood and routine, then what does it say about the value of being able to live without such interruptions. And in the rush of everyday life, are we truly recognizing how extraordinary it is to simply feel well?

Caste and Cricket

I was watching a cricket reel yesterday and an idea struck me that I could not let go. Why is it that in a country of more than a billion people the same few names keep repeating again and again in cricket. I have followed the game for over twenty years and in that time I have seen players rise and fall I have seen new faces enter and old faces retire, yet certain surnames seem to repeat endlessly across generations. Sharmas, Singhs, Patels, Yadavs and many more.

Now you could argue that these are just common sur names and naturally some of them will rise to the top. But is it really just about coincidence or are we ignoring something. Because cricket in India has always been painted as a game that is free of divisions, a game where the best talent finds its place irrespective of background. That is what we are told and that is what we want to believe. Yet when we notice the pattern of recurring names, the question becomes harder to push aside.

We have heard officials and experts say, the board selects only on the basis of talent. But we have also seen stories and films that hint at a different picture. Somewhere between these two sides lies a truth that is neither spoken nor confronted. And in that space the same names keep surfacing.

Think of the South of India. Cricket is taught here with the same passion the same dedication and the same love for the game. There have been players from the region who have made a mark, but look closely at the numbers and the careers and you will see how short their span often is. Why is that. Does it mean the South does not produce talent or does it mean the system filters it in ways that are not always visible.

This is not about questioning the skill of the Sharmas or the Yadavs or anyone else, because their contributions to the game cannot be ignored. The question is why we keep hearing the same clusters of names while countless others are left unheard. If talent is truly scattered across the nation, why does it seem to be concentrated only in particular pool of players.

And here lies the contradiction. Cricket is celebrated as the one sport that unites millions in this country. People of every caste and community fill the stadiums, they buy the tickets, they wave the flags and they put their emotions on the line. The game demands inclusivity from the audience, but does it extend the same inclusivity to the players.

So the question is, If the selection table is not free from caste then what does it say about the future of Indian cricket. If cricket chooses its players from a narrow pool while taking money and loyalty from the whole country is this truly a fair sport or just another face of the society we live in. And if that is the case how many world cups do we dream of winning when half the nation’s talent is never even given a chance to step on the pitch. 

Why Is Dowry Still Alive

Dowry in India began centuries ago as a gesture of security for women and in its earliest form it was meant to provide them with ornaments, land or cattle as a safeguard in their married life. It was not born out of greed but out of a need to ensure that a woman was not left helpless if something went wrong. Yet over the years what once stood as a symbol of protection slowly changed its meaning until it became a burden.

In the beginning, dowry did give women some form of independence. It gave them a share of their parental wealth and was meant to act as their personal safety net. But that sense of empowerment is long gone. Today dowry has turned into a transaction and its purpose is no longer to protect but to showcase wealth and social standing. That is why you must wonder why a belief that has lost all meaning continues to exist.

So there is this thing of increasing dowry money. It may have started with a few sovereigns of gold but today it has reached a point where cars, houses, cash and endless gifts are part of the ritual. What this has done is create a cycle where those who can afford it raise the bar while those who cannot are forced to stretch themselves just to match. Even when they try to keep things simple they are not free because society now measures worth against what others have displayed.

The reason dowry has not stopped is because the one who could afford to say no have not said it. Their silence keeps the practice alive. And when they give, it is not done privately or to protect their kids. They make a headlines of it. They let the world know what they have offered. They treat it as a matter of pride but when in truth it is nothing but social irresponsibility that pushes others into this void.

It is not always the ones who ask who are at fault. Of course many demand dowry and in some cases even women themselves have done so. But that does not mean the one providing it is free of blame. The giver and the receiver share equal responsibility. Without that recognition there will never be change.

Every time a rich family spends lavishly on dowry, they may believe they are securing their daughter’s future, but in reality they are contributing to a system that has already destroyed countless lives. They may never see it but somewhere another family is falling apart under pressure somewhere another woman is being harassed because her family could not give enough.

Instead of all this the true gift is education. Teach daughters how to face challenges, give them the confidence to leave a broken marriage, support them in standing tall on their own. Women today are educated, they work, they hold positions as high as men do and they do not need dowry to define or secure themselves.

Change must begin somewhere and it can only begin by saying "NO". If you believe you can afford dowry ask yourself what you are actually achieving by offering it. Ask yourself if your generosity is worth the tragedies that follow and whether you want to be a silent part of the same story.

Every time you add to this tradition you are not just giving gifts you are keeping a system alive, that has destroyed families and taken daughters to graves. The question is not whether you can afford it, the question is whether you can live with being part of the reason it still exists.