If India is computer, Cong is its default programme: Rahul Gandhi

Reading reactions of members from different states of our country, I am afraid congress will have to start its re-building its organization allover again in different states where they will have nothing much left. Or better still they will follow suggestion made by Gandhi Ji to dissolve the party as it has lost it's aim which was to fight against Brits.

This congress is not congress which foght with Brits for freedom. Original congress was divided in 1968 or 1969 it is know as Kamraj Plan.

All India Congress which was formed during Independance years was a committed party and there was a purpose of gaining freedom.But after freedom, the leaders had no such patriotism, instead began looking after their personal interests right from the time Neg hru became the PM.Indira Gandhi went one step further and institutionalised corruption...Only Lal Bahadur Shastri can be remembered as a tall leader and P.V.Narasimha Rao too was good in his own way.But after it came back in the hands of the family and recently after Sonia Gandhi took over it has been steadily taking a single route - downwards, taking the nation with it....

Yes i agree. But I want to see it in a different perspective . Why are the people of India electing the corrupt Government again and again ?
Do we don't have an alternative ?
Are the people satisfied with Congress ruling ?

The first and foremost error was to make Nehru the PM of this country. He was a known corrupt personality right from beginning who knew very little about real India. He behaved like British behaved but kept distance from real measures of progress. He was ignorant of many things but did every thing to make himself popular. His daughter otherwise a brave and shrewd lady made things worse. I think if Sanjay Gandhi was not killed he could have make a better PM than Rajiv. Now wait for next king in making, if you know his rea story you will feel like committing a harakiri.

I am amused. The author of 'discovery of India' did know know India? He is founder of five year plans and he was instrumental in creating infrastructure like dams, electricity, steel, railway for India. Yet he did not know real measures of progress! He gave boost to science and engineering. How he was ignorant?

To give credit to Nehru, Discovery of India written by him indeed is a masterpiece in many ways and even now, one must read it compulsorily to gain an insight into the history of India. But in many ways, he has been dismissive of the most critical and crucial parts of India such as religions, and really tried put various religious leaders, philosophies and especially the Brahmins in an extremely poor light which is not expected from a responsible leader and a person stationed in his position. I also accept that his panchshil philosophy was not doubt brilliant, but was he able to instil those very values of integrity, honesty etc. which he preached about in his followers? Did he himself follow them?

I am giving here a link to critical analysis of the book, I implore everyone to read it carefully! I myself have read the book and have found many of these to be quite true especially the parts the author of the blog says here:

Although the books claims to be a ‘discovery of India‘, South India is almost completely excluded. There are references to the South here and there but nothing much. As if it were not a part of India…
South has so much history and culture. I don’t know why he did not think it necessary or important to write about it.

and

There’s just half a page on Tilak and Gokhale. These two persons who were political activities, thinkers, philosophers par excellence and were the front runners in the struggle for freedom, Nehru has found them not worthy of enough mention! :blink:
These and many other facts do question his knowledge and understanding of India, its history, its people and his own perspective about all things Indian!

Here is the link to the blog,

Here is the link to the blog,

(Deleted the link as per instruction from admin)

Thank you for critical appreciation of Nehru's book. But my only submission is that author of 'Discovery of India' and 'Glimpses of world history' can not be considered as ignorant of history of this country or world. Everyone has his own views on religion, culture and allied matters and these get reflected in his work. Those in disagreement with him or rather anyone may express their dissent but cannot belittle him saying that he is ignorant.

Here is the link to the blog,

Deleted the link as per instruction from admin

Thank you for critical appreciation of Nehru's book. But my only submission is that author of 'Discovery of India' and 'Glimpses of world history' can not be considered as ignorant of history of this country or world. Everyone has his own views on religion, culture and allied matters and these get reflected in his work. Those in disagreement with him or rather anyone may express their dissent but cannot belittle him saying that he is ignorant.

I would call him a shrewd and a manipulative person, but surely not ignorant. In fact the book Discovery of India demonstrates his knowledge but we still cannot ignore that he was totally judgmental and took care to write only about his own perceptions about it. While at the same time dismissed or disregarded several factors which in reality constitute what India really is and what it stands for !

Here is the link to the blog,

http://letteredfeelings.blogspot.in/2011/01/discovery-of-india-jawaharlal-nehru.html

Thank you for critical appreciation of Nehru's book. But my only submission is that author of 'Discovery of India' and 'Glimpses of world history' can not be considered as ignorant of history of this country or world. Everyone has his own views on religion, culture and allied matters and these get reflected in his work. Those in disagreement with him or rather anyone may express their dissent but cannot belittle him saying that he is ignorant.

I would call him a shrewd and a manipulative person, but surely not ignorant. In fact the book Discovery of India demonstrates his knowledge but we still cannot ignore that he was totally judgmental and took care to write only about his own perceptions about it. While at the same time dismissed or disregarded several factors which in reality constitute what India really is and what it stands for !

We can't fault him for writing according to his own perception. He was not writing for some college syllabus. Others can give their own version. .People have different angles to see history. A Marxist will write history according to 'class analysis' or 'materialist interpretation of history'.. S.A. Dange, a prominent Communist leader wrote a book- 'From primitive communism to slavery' in which he wrote history of ancient India. We may again differ but cannot say that he was ignorant or not a scholar.

Here is the link to the blog,

http://letteredfeelings.blogspot.in/2011/01/discovery-of-india-jawaharlal-nehru.html

Thank you for critical appreciation of Nehru's book. But my only submission is that author of 'Discovery of India' and 'Glimpses of world history' can not be considered as ignorant of history of this country or world. Everyone has his own views on religion, culture and allied matters and these get reflected in his work. Those in disagreement with him or rather anyone may express their dissent but cannot belittle him saying that he is ignorant.

I would call him a shrewd and a manipulative person, but surely not ignorant. In fact the book Discovery of India demonstrates his knowledge but we still cannot ignore that he was totally judgmental and took care to write only about his own perceptions about it. While at the same time dismissed or disregarded several factors which in reality constitute what India really is and what it stands for !

We can't fault him for writing according to his own perception. He was not writing for some college syllabus. Others can give their own version. .People have different angles to see history. A Marxist will write history according to 'class analysis' or 'materialist interpretation of history'.. S.A. Dange, a prominent Communist leader wrote a book- 'From primitive communism to slavery' in which he wrote history of ancient India. We may again differ but cannot say that he was ignorant or not a scholar.

Actually, the position and the stature that he held in life, it was wrong of him to write in that manner. It is true that we cannot dictate how or how not a person should write, but for a statesman, a more balanced approach is expected. Especially when that person is being looked upon as a leader of a vast nation, he chooses ignore completely selected factions or even states in HIS OWN country, that is not at all acceptable!

Here is the link to the blog,

http://letteredfeelings.blogspot.in/2011/01/discovery-of-india-jawaharlal-nehru.html

Thank you for critical appreciation of Nehru's book. But my only submission is that author of 'Discovery of India' and 'Glimpses of world history' can not be considered as ignorant of history of this country or world. Everyone has his own views on religion, culture and allied matters and these get reflected in his work. Those in disagreement with him or rather anyone may express their dissent but cannot belittle him saying that he is ignorant.

I would call him a shrewd and a manipulative person, but surely not ignorant. In fact the book Discovery of India demonstrates his knowledge but we still cannot ignore that he was totally judgmental and took care to write only about his own perceptions about it. While at the same time dismissed or disregarded several factors which in reality constitute what India really is and what it stands for !

We can't fault him for writing according to his own perception. He was not writing for some college syllabus. Others can give their own version. .People have different angles to see history. A Marxist will write history according to 'class analysis' or 'materialist interpretation of history'.. S.A. Dange, a prominent Communist leader wrote a book- 'From primitive communism to slavery' in which he wrote history of ancient India. We may again differ but cannot say that he was ignorant or not a scholar.

Actually, the position and the stature that he held in life, it was wrong of him to write in that manner. It is true that we cannot dictate how or how not a person should write, but for a statesman, a more balanced approach is expected. Especially when that person is being looked upon as a leader of a vast nation, he chooses ignore completely selected factions or even states in HIS OWN country, that is not at all acceptable!

He wrote the books when India was not free and he has no official designation. He did not write as P.M. But even if he wrote, this won't matter. You may always make a critical appreciation of any book. The only issue is whether he was ignorant of India as claimed by a member.

In the recent by poll election held in Karnataka (for Mandaya and Rural Bangalore Lok Sabha seats ), Congress bagged both the seats. Actress Ramya won in Mandaya Constituency . These were Considered to be JD(S) forts

In the recent by poll election held in Karnataka (for Mandaya and Rural Bangalore Lok Sabha seats ), Congress bagged both the seats. Actress Ramya won in Mandaya Constituency . These were Considered to be JD(S) forts

This indicates that the MODI wave is artificial. The JD(S) candidates had support of BJP.

In the recent by poll election held in Karnataka (for Mandaya and Rural Bangalore Lok Sabha seats ), Congress bagged both the seats. Actress Ramya won in Mandaya Constituency . These were Considered to be JD(S) forts

Mandya from where Ramya contested is vokkaliga belt and senior actor Ambareesh who is himself a gowda had apparently distributed cash and almost threatened the people to vote for her since she was selected by him....No wonder she won since the population is largely rural with no educated classes...another factor was her father passing away on the day she filed her nomination, so she had a lot of sympathy factor as well..

In the recent by poll election held in Karnataka (for Mandaya and Rural Bangalore Lok Sabha seats ), Congress bagged both the seats. Actress Ramya won in Mandaya Constituency . These were Considered to be JD(S) forts

This indicates that the MODI wave is artificial. The JD(S) candidates had support of BJP.

People of Karnataka don't forgot dirty politics of BJP government. Public don't forget rapine of Karnataka resourcess by BJP leaders.

In the recent by poll election held in Karnataka (for Mandaya and Rural Bangalore Lok Sabha seats ), Congress bagged both the seats. Actress Ramya won in Mandaya Constituency . These were Considered to be JD(S) forts

This indicates that the MODI wave is artificial. The JD(S) candidates had support of BJP.

People of Karnataka don't forgot dirty politics of BJP government. Public don't forget rapine of Karnataka resourcess by BJP leaders.

All parties are similar. So the incumbency factor works. The ruling party loses and the other gains. This may happen everywhere. Then we may not expect much change.

It is necessary to be completely objective in the study of leaders or leader especially one as important as Pandit Nehru but some kind of subjectivity would always there in evaluating his performance as PM for a long time. It is said about him that if he had not been in politics, he would be remembered for his literary brilliance alone in the form of works mentioned already. Writing history and to be a master in its scientific analysis to earn its place as an authentic history are two different things that's perhaps the reason that Nehru's works are recommended as literary works than as text books of history.

It is worth-remembering here that Pandit Nehru was not the first choice of Gandhiji as he was somewhat disillusioned with him for reasons best known. At hindsight, I too feel Sardar Patel could have been appropriate to begin with. Many portray him as the architect of modern India, that's too tall a claim open to verification. What kind of modernity we have achieved when the reports of rape rule all the front pages of our newspapers for days on end? If you want to base your claim on some gigantic factories and imposing edifices, let the credit go to our engineers, our workers and other who actually built them. India's moral degradation started with Nehru's misrule. His foreign policy was a complete disaster. He was attracted to the USSR but never felt sure of himself to go the whole hog and in the process incurred America's wrath and suspicion which bluntly refused to share industrial technology with India and the USSR stepped into it and provided India the much-needed help not without a price - a huge price, indeed. In fact, it even treated India as colony and derive maximum commercial advantage out of it. Once I heard from a top-notch officer of a state-ran steel plant that Russian were so shrewd and ruthless in their exploitation that it didn't part with the blueprint of some of the plants they built! If you visit Durgapur you still can see the posh and swanky
bungalows for Russian engineers who seemed to be perpetually stationed over there. For this so-called help Russia extracted the maximum price in the political field. Nehru blindly endorsed Russian invasion of Hungary. He even had delusions about himself to be a great leader in the global stage by grandstanding with Nasser and Tito in founding Non-aligned Movement which was a boneless wonder and most ridiculous aspect of it, was some of these countries with pronounced bias in favor of Russia joined to have the best of all the worlds including India running with hare and hunting with the hound!! His Himalayan folly in dealing with Kashmir issue a wound that has turned cancerous with his touch, his Chinese policy cost India a lot.

It is also wrong to credit him with the concept of India's Five-Year Plan and if my memory serves me right Netaji Shubhash Chandra Bose as Congress President mooted the idea and Nehru was very close to him but as a rank opportunist dumped him to be close to Gandhiji, although he never sincerely believed in his views. As you all know Gandhiji was never in favor of big industries rather his faith was only in small and cottage industries. About religious matter both shared diametrically opposite views yet he deceived him mercilessly and knew the value of 'Gandhi' tag which is being exploited till date. And about his personal life I have to mention the work of M.O. Mathai entitled 'Reminiscences of the Nehru Age' who served him as his private secretary for a long time which went I through and frankly speaking I started asking myself : "Does this man deserve to be put on a pedestal?

Thank you for exhaustive treatment of the thread. However the issue was only a statement by Rahul Gandhi, which is however no so significant. But we discussed so many things. It is nice that you have portrayed Nehru as a good literary figure though expressed some of his shortcomings as P.M. and also visualized how India would be under alternative leadership. But the fact remains that Nehru was our first P.M. Naturally the credit of achievement by our engineers and technocrats goes top P.M. We can not discredit him for shortcomings while denying him credit for progress.

Thank you for exhaustive treatment of the thread. However the issue was only a statement by Rahul Gandhi, which is however no so significant. But we discussed so many things. It is nice that you have portrayed Nehru as a good literary figure though expressed some of his shortcomings as P.M. and also visualized how India would be under alternative leadership. But the fact remains that Nehru was our first P.M. Naturally the credit of achievement by our engineers and technocrats goes top P.M. We can not discredit him for shortcomings while denying him credit for progress.

I didn't intend to veer to that but so many comments have been made about Panditji that I couldn't help. If you want to credit him for that you are rightly entitled to do so. He is a historical figure and all aspects of his performance have to be considered for a rational judgement. What I tried was just a sketchy work on him.

Thank you for exhaustive treatment of the thread. However the issue was only a statement by Rahul Gandhi, which is however no so significant. But we discussed so many things. It is nice that you have portrayed Nehru as a good literary figure though expressed some of his shortcomings as P.M. and also visualized how India would be under alternative leadership. But the fact remains that Nehru was our first P.M. Naturally the credit of achievement by our engineers and technocrats goes top P.M. We can not discredit him for shortcomings while denying him credit for progress.

Isn't it the beauty of discussion that they started at one point but reached the other. It may sound out of context but everyone here want to emphasize that Gandhi family has never thought about India

Thank you for exhaustive treatment of the thread. However the issue was only a statement by Rahul Gandhi, which is however no so significant. But we discussed so many things. It is nice that you have portrayed Nehru as a good literary figure though expressed some of his shortcomings as P.M. and also visualized how India would be under alternative leadership. But the fact remains that Nehru was our first P.M. Naturally the credit of achievement by our engineers and technocrats goes top P.M. We can not discredit him for shortcomings while denying him credit for progress.

Isn't it the beauty of discussion that they started at one point but reached the other. It may sound out of context but everyone here want to emphasize that Gandhi family has never thought about India

And the best part is we have nothing personal against anyone. This is just for the sake of letting others know how we think about a political party, personality or happenings around us.

Thank you for exhaustive treatment of the thread. However the issue was only a statement by Rahul Gandhi, which is however no so significant. But we discussed so many things. It is nice that you have portrayed Nehru as a good literary figure though expressed some of his shortcomings as P.M. and also visualized how India would be under alternative leadership. But the fact remains that Nehru was our first P.M. Naturally the credit of achievement by our engineers and technocrats goes top P.M. We can not discredit him for shortcomings while denying him credit for progress.

I didn't intend to veer to that but so many comments have been made about Panditji that I couldn't help. If you want to credit him for that you are rightly entitled to do so. He is a historical figure and all aspects of his performance have to be considered for a rational judgement. What I tried was just a sketchy work on him.

The thread indeed is about Rahul Gandhi's comment but no issue where he is involved can be discussed completely without mention of other members of the family, because I firmly believe a family tradition and background is what makes a man, so what Rahul Gandhi now is and stands for, is the total embodiment of the Nehru-Gandhi family so it is not irrelevant to discuss about Nehru or his shortcomings as a PM, they are very much relevant since India today is the result of his actions and deeds!

Thank you for exhaustive treatment of the thread. However the issue was only a statement by Rahul Gandhi, which is however no so significant. But we discussed so many things. It is nice that you have portrayed Nehru as a good literary figure though expressed some of his shortcomings as P.M. and also visualized how India would be under alternative leadership. But the fact remains that Nehru was our first P.M. Naturally the credit of achievement by our engineers and technocrats goes top P.M. We can not discredit him for shortcomings while denying him credit for progress.

Isn't it the beauty of discussion that they started at one point but reached the other. It may sound out of context but everyone here want to emphasize that Gandhi family has never thought about India

Thats how discussions are, meant to bring out all the aspects that are there relating to the topic of discussion.If we are expected to stick to the sentence that was written while starting the discussion we will hardly geet any opinion from members...

Thank you for exhaustive treatment of the thread. However the issue was only a statement by Rahul Gandhi, which is however no so significant. But we discussed so many things. It is nice that you have portrayed Nehru as a good literary figure though expressed some of his shortcomings as P.M. and also visualized how India would be under alternative leadership. But the fact remains that Nehru was our first P.M. Naturally the credit of achievement by our engineers and technocrats goes top P.M. We can not discredit him for shortcomings while denying him credit for progress.

Isn't it the beauty of discussion that they started at one point but reached the other. It may sound out of context but everyone here want to emphasize that Gandhi family has never thought about India

Gandhi family has indeed been in freedom movement and after independence development. But outlook differs. some may like and some dislike. Had they never thought of India and just remain indifferent, we would not be talking about them at all.