India, an ancient civilization for thousands of years, is now full of various social problems: caste discrimination, inequality between men and women, gap between rich and poor, split public opinion... When they heard these criticisms, Indians justified it: at least we are "Asian The biggest democracy", our country is the people's say. And the criticism of this "Stubborn Newton" is directed at the bottom line in the hearts of Indians: democratic election. Some film critics said: This film strips Indian society naked.
The protagonist "Newton" in the film is a meticulous national civil servant. He insisted on the rules, insisted on "fair elections"-although sometimes insisted a little stubbornly. He personally supervised the election despite the opposition of the commander; he went to great lengths to explain the importance of the election to the people; he adhered to the rules and worked till the last minute. His thinking may be a bit stubborn, but what we need is this kind of civil servants who stick to principles and stick to their work. With such people, our society has hope.
"That machine is an interesting toy, with cows, petals, and many patterns on it. Choose one and press the button next to it, and it's done." The commander is also a good person, but his ideas are more realistic. A wide range of candidates, an incomprehensible election platform, and more importantly, no candidate will pay attention to this ultra-small constituency with only 76 votes. Electing no one will improve the life here, just like when an old man asked The male protagonist is speechless when it comes to choosing which candidate will make Kaduye (a local product) a good price. It’s the same for everyone, and the electoral machine is really just a toy.
What is worth noting is the attitude of the supervisor's deputy inspector. When the male protagonist reported a problem, he assumed an indifferent attitude, even a little acquiescing to the commander's behavior; and when foreign reporters visited, he asked the commander to "catch" a group of voters at all costs. It is really rare to be forced to exercise the right to vote by gunshot. So we saw that foreign reporters reported that the local people did not hesitate to risk their lives to exercise their rights; and behind them were thin and helpless "voters." The government does not care about civil rights, they only care about votes and false names. What is the significance of such "democracy"?
A sage once said: The right to subsistence and the right to development are the greatest civil rights. The people don't want ideals, ism, they only want two things-bread and water. They support whoever can give it to them. Democracy is not just a system, but also an ideology. Only when the government believes in democracy and supports democracy can the country be truly called a "democratic country", not a means to fool itself and deceive others.
View more about Newton reviews
