My Voice Doesn't Need A Celebrity

This morning, I woke up at 8 a.m., started talking to one of my roommates, and somehow ended up having one of those conversations that refuses to end.

We were talking about celebrities.

More specifically, celebrities who don’t have an opinion.

My roommate asked a very simple question: Why do we celebrate people who won’t even take a stand for us?

And honestly, I understood the question.

We live in a country where celebrities have enormous reach. One post from a famous actor can reach millions of people within minutes. So when something is happening politically or socially, people often ask, “Why isn’t so-and-so saying anything?”

But then I started wondering:

Why are we waiting for them?

Suppose there is a student protest happening. Suppose Shah Rukh Khan tweets, “Please support the students.”

Okay.

Then what?

Do I go?

Maybe. But only if I already believe in what those students are fighting for.

If I don’t agree with the protest, am I suddenly going to change my ideology because Shah Rukh Khan posted about it?

No.

And this is where I think we sometimes confuse being a fan with being a citizen.

I absolutely love Shah Rukh Khan. I can watch him talk for hours. I can defend his movies, quote his dialogues and remain embarrassingly excited about anything he does.

But if tomorrow he tells me to buy tobacco, I am not going to buy tobacco.

If he tells me a particular car is the best car in the world, I am not going to sell my belongings and buy it the next morning.

An advertisement is not a moral instruction.

And neither is a celebrity’s political opinion.

If Shah Rukh Khan tweets something that aligns with my beliefs, I might appreciate that he said it. But I don’t need him to say it before I decide what I believe.

And if he says something completely opposite to what I believe?

Then I disagree with him.

That doesn’t suddenly make me less of a fan.

This is where celebrity culture becomes strange to me.

We sometimes treat famous people as if fame automatically comes with political authority.

Why?

Because someone has acted in 80 films, does that mean they understand every political issue? Because someone has 50 million followers, does that mean their interpretation of a protest is more informed than that of the people actually participating in it?

And sometimes the opposite happens too.

A celebrity says something politically convenient, and thousands of people immediately repeat it without even checking whether the person has understood the issue properly.

What if they have half the information?

What if they misunderstood the situation?

What if they have completely different political beliefs from you?

What if they’re simply wrong?

Are we still supposed to wait for them to speak?

My roommate’s argument was different. He said that celebrities make enormous amounts of money from ordinary people — from our attention, our money, our fandom — and therefore they should give something back to society.

I understand that argument too.

But I don’t think the responsibility of citizenship can be outsourced.

Celebrities are not the government.

They are not elected representatives.

They are not automatically activists.

They are not philanthropists simply because they are famous.

And they certainly aren’t our political conscience.

Take any major celebrity. Kamal Haasan. Rajinikanth. Shah Rukh Khan. Anyone.

Why should I wait for them to tell me what is happening?

Why should my political awareness begin when someone famous posts an Instagram story?

Why should my participation in a movement depend on whether a person I admire has approved it?

If I believe something is wrong, I should be able to recognise that without waiting for a celebrity’s permission.

If I believe something needs to change, I should be able to decide what I can do about it without waiting for a famous person to post a hashtag.

And perhaps most importantly, if a celebrity disagrees with me, I should still be capable of thinking for myself.

That’s the part I find most important.

I don’t want people standing on the streets because Shah Rukh Khan told them to.

I want people standing there because they have understood what they are standing for.

Not because they’re his fans.

Not because they’re Rajinikanth fans.

Not because some actor posted a story.

Not because someone famous gave them a slogan.

Because they, as citizens, made a decision.

Maybe that’s what we should expect from celebrities too.

Not that they speak for us.

But that they are free to speak for themselves — and we are free to agree, disagree, ignore them, question them, or change our minds.

I can love an actor without adopting his politics.

I can admire a singer without agreeing with her opinions.

I can watch a film starring someone whose political views I completely disagree with.

And I can still remain a fan.

Because admiration does not have to mean obedience.

A celebrity can have a voice. But my voice doesn’t have to wait for theirs.

Maybe we should stop asking, “Why hasn’t my favourite celebrity spoken yet?”

And start asking ourselves:

“What do I think?”