Be it social media influencers from the Left side of the political spectrum or the right, many have come forward to take a shield for ‘Comedian’ Samay Raina and Podcaster Ranveer Allahbadia for his abhorrent remarks made during one of the show of controversial India’s Got Latent episode. The change in the stance of these influencers has been sudden which draws many speculations. With many social media influencers coming in support of them, they present different points that do not look convincing at the first place.
The controversy surrounding Ranveer Allahbadia and Comedian Samay Raina’s show ‘India’s Got Latent’ has sparked a wave of defenses from the self-proclaimed liberals who now find themselves entangled in contradictions. These are the same people who have previously cheered for legal action against others for far less, yet they are now bending over backward to shield these entitled brats. Their arguments ranging from free speech absolutism to conspiracies about corporate interests expose their selective moral outrage and intellectual dishonesty.
One of the most common defenses is the classic “free speech must have no limits” argument. The same individuals who have previously called for bans, FIRs, and even arrests over controversial statements are now preaching the importance of unrestricted speech. Suddenly, jokes and offensive remarks, things they once labeled as dangerous are being excused as harmless. Their shift in stance is not because they have discovered a newfound commitment to free speech, but because the individuals in question belong to the elite class and presenting them as a “victim” suits them ‘economically’ and for their business interests.
Ironically, the law which didn’t seem regressive to many from the section of the RW earlier, are now finding it “TOO MUCH” to book someone for making ‘jokes’, no matter how ‘stupid’ or ‘reprehensible’ it may be, is now giving them impression of an upcoming POLICE STATE, Talibanised India and far worse, many of them have even repeated the leftist boogie repeated like a broken casette, ‘death to democracy’. The furore over so-called excess of law in the episode of Samay Raina, Ranveer Allahabadia seems to be a redux of the Aryan Khan fiasco where many had publicly questioned the need for stern NDPS provisions and the ‘tolerable’, ‘non-prosecutable’ quantity of possesion of banned substances.
The awakened citizens alleging excesses now, were not fence sitters or mute spectators in cases against poor or ideological opponent, rather they at times were vocal supporter of prosecuting others for ‘Jokes on religion’, even ‘Jokes on politicians’, sacrificing Free Speech, other liberal values, risk of India curbing dissent, getting into a Talibanised state, clogging of the Indian legal system, other pressing issues in the country. For them, joke on their favourite politican tantamount to grave crime, and worthy to be booked, public name shame, condemnation which they now term as “social media lynching, hounding”, but how dare, the rich gets to face the music of law. Mind you, if the “vocal” netizens coming out in shield of Samay Raina and Ranveer Allahabadia, have conviction, clarity and principled stance in their approach, they should walk the talk by helping their ‘social reformers’ getting “state excess”, ie., FIR quashed.
Another weak defense is the appeal to personal character. Defenders argue that these figures have done good work in their fields and, therefore, should not be held accountable for a “single mistake.” The idea that past achievements grant immunity from scrutiny is absurd, especially coming from those who have historically been quick to demand accountability from others. When similar arguments were made for figures they disliked, these same people dismissed them as deflections and demanded punishment.
The legal argument is yet another convenient tool in their arsenal. They claim that India’s judicial system is already overburdened and that filing FIRs over a joke is a waste of taxpayer money. Yet, these are the same voices that celebrated legal action in cases where their ideological opponents were involved.
Beyond legal justifications, some have spun conspiracy theories, suggesting that big corporations and media houses are targeting independent creators like Samay Raina. According to this view, his growing popularity without Bollywood’s support has made him a target. This argument is not only baseless but also a distraction from the actual issue at hand whether their statements were abhorrent or not and if they should be held accountable. Instead of addressing the controversy, they try to portray them as victims of a larger plot.
Even more hypocritical is the way some liberals have shifted their stance on political involvement. In the past, they justified action against individuals like TrueIndology, arguing that “timing matters” and that controversial speech should be met with consequences. Now, when similar criticism is directed at Samay Raina and Ranveer Allahbadia, they suddenly believe in allowing free discourse. The inconsistency is glaring.
Another common claim is that taking legal action sets a dangerous precedent and pushes India toward becoming a police state. Ironically, these same individuals have previously supported legal measures against those they disagreed with, never once expressing concerns about government overreach. Their principles change depending on whose speech is under scrutiny, proving that their advocacy for free speech is not rooted in genuine belief but in political convenience.
Some even go to the extent of comparing legal action against Samay Raina and Ranveer Allahabadia to religious extremism, claiming that punishing them would be akin to Taliban-style governance. This is an obvious strawman argument meant to paint critics as unreasonable. The reality is that legal consequences for public figures are part of any democratic society. The selective application of free speech arguments, the sudden concern for legal efficiency, and the absurd conspiracy theories all point to a desperate attempt to shield some while denying the same leniency to others.
To sum up all defence arguments cropped up in their support so far, here are the major pointers —
- FIR is too much – forgive them
- Legal System is clogged
- The question of ‘priority’, far worse crimes are happening so minor offences should be given a free pass, combined with privilege given to comedians
- They are the victim, being hounded by jeoulous people — being dubbed by some as “Downfall porn”
- Economic conspiracy at play, giant OTT players in nexus with government to nip a promising show in the bud
- ‘Actions’ and not words should be the yardsticks
- Long posts giving innane arguments
