US Secretary of State Marco Rubio on UN comments on CJP Protests : "UN Experts are oxymorons. It’s a domestic political matter. We won't get into this. They have a democracy. They have elections here. We have protests every day in the United States".

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio described the term "UN experts" as an "oxymoron" during a visit to Mumbai, declining to comment on India's internal political matters regarding protests.

Rubio stated that India is a democracy with regular elections, and domestic political matters must be navigated entirely by the Indian people.

He noted that expressing differing political views is a natural feature of a democracy, but drew a clear distinction between peaceful protests and riots that involve vandalism or arson.

Astrologers should be the face of the CleanRivers Campaign. For years, they have encouraged millions of people to offer sarees, ghee, honey, and other items to rivers in the hope of seeking divine blessings. The same influence can now be channelled towards a greater cause: protecting and cleaning our rivers.

As trusted voices who influence public beliefs and practices, astrologers should create videos urging people to stop polluting rivers and instead participate in river-cleaning initiatives. By connecting river conservation with spiritual responsibility, they can inspire millions to understand that serving and protecting our rivers is also a way of seeking blessings.

ok so the timeline....

Oct 10: cops pull Dipke, Das and Ranka off a flight. 7,000+ protesters detained across Delhi that day. released Oct 11 on ₹50k bonds to keep the peace for a year.

Oct 11: same day, police commissioner de-notifies Jantar Mantar. no reason given. names three replacement sites like that fixes anything. CJP had given written notice asking for a response within 24 hours. that request just vibed into the void.

Oct 13: Das, Ranka and others enter Jantar Mantar with the tricolour. allegedly jumped from the JDU office premises. two FIRs filed.

Oct 14: SEM sends Das and Ranka to five days judicial custody. why? no "sound surety." Shinde, accused of the exact same conduct, gets a personal bond. same act, different result. interesting.

Oct 19: second SEM extends custody by two days. sureties rejected over a "document mismatch." order says they showed no respect for law. sure buddy.

Oct 20-21: petition in Delhi HC on Dussehra vacation. hearing listed Oct 21. that's 8 days in custody by now.

so the legal question everyone's dancing around: which track is this even? if it's a criminal case, it goes through BNSS 187 before a judicial magistrate. if it's preventive, the statute wants an inquiry, and jail only after a bond breach is proved to the magistrate's satisfaction with recorded grounds. so where's the recorded finding? what conduct breached what bond? nobody's answering. the SEM just adopted the police application like a template.

also fun fact: SEMs are senior police officers with magisterial powers. a police-linked officer ruled on a police application. very independent. very judicial. Madras HC has held they gotta stay preventive and can't impose imprisonment. just saying.

and the surety rejection? there's a 2018 Delhi HC judgment (Aldanish Rein) saying release on personal bond while surety verification is pending. rejecting sureties over photo mismatches while two guys sit in jail for 8 days is not "preventive." that's punishment .defence says two more sureties were present and never even heard.

denotifying the protest site the day after refusing permission, no stated reason, criminalising entry within roughly a day, then jailing people for jumping a gate a few days after signing bonds. totally normal stuff. Supreme Court itself said it couldn't presume a law and order problem from CJP's earlier march. but sure.

and the framing war: BJP says "anarchist forces." CJP says "unofficial emergency." Rahul Gandhi says cowardice. both sides doing PR while the actual legal mechanism is a mess.

to be fair, CJP's "our only crime was waving the flag" is spin too. they jumped a locked gate a day after the order, days after signing bonds. that's a choice. defiance was a choice. but the response? holding two people 8 days on preventive provisions for a bailable trespass, with rejected sureties and "habitualness" reasoning that punishes a protest record instead of an act? that's not law, for sure.

the state had a clean option. FIR, remand, bail, done. instead they used a hybrid and now the HC is looking at it. the hearing getting pushed around while the custody clock keeps ticking tells you everything. they're not trying to win the legal argument, they're trying to outlast the protest.

government rattled? yeah. a little. you can tell by how hard they're trying to make flag waving sound like terrorism....🙂‍↕️

X post by Asad Ashraf

Original link: https://x.com/asad_ashraf88/status/2112496445924548906

ThePrint article link: https://theprint.in/opinion/sharjeel-imams-islamist-manifesto-will-be-forgotten-the-silence-of-liberals-will-not/3074221/

An article has been circulating in the print media, written by an IPS officer who goes by the name of Ibn-e-Khaldun Bharti, questioning Sharjeel Imam’s politics by branding him anti-secular, Islamist, reductionist, conservative, and everything else that can be deployed to delegitimise a political subject without seriously engaging with his ideas. One cannot help but wonder why the author chooses to conceal his identity behind a pseudonym.

To understand Sharjeel Imam, one must engage with critical theory, political philosophy, metaphysics, and the historical conditions that shape political thought. One cannot reduce his politics to the familiar binaries of secularism and communalism, or expect complex questions of Muslim political identity, representation, and resistance to yield to such convenient categories.

It is particularly disappointing that many academics who understand these complexities choose to remain silent, even as public discourse increasingly turns into an exercise in labelling, vilification, and intellectual simplification.

Sharjeel Imam’s critique of the Constitution, or his questioning of the political order it sustains, does not automatically amount to a rejection of constitutionalism. The Constitution itself provides for its amendment, while democratic politics must retain the space to question existing institutions, arrangements, and constitutional assumptions. A constitutional democracy that cannot accommodate fundamental criticism of its own framework risks reducing dissent to a privilege granted at the convenience of those in power.

His invocation of Muhammad Ali Jinnah and Muhammad Iqbal must also be understood within the larger history of Muslim political thought in the subcontinent. They are part of our pre-Partition intellectual and political history, however uncomfortable that history may be. We cannot simply erase them from our historical consciousness because their ideas, political choices, or legacies are contested. To invoke Jinnah is not necessarily to endorse Jinnah, just as engaging with a political thinker does not amount to an uncritical acceptance of everything they believed or represented.

History cannot be understood through selective remembrance, nor can political thought be evaluated through guilt by association. The task is to interrogate, contextualise, and critically engage with these legacies, not to banish them from legitimate discourse.

The easiest thing for political polemicists to do is to call Sharjeel Imam an Islamist, reduce his arguments to a convenient ideological label, and present that label as sufficient justification for his political and social exclusion. In a climate where such labels can have consequences far beyond intellectual debate, this is a particularly dangerous exercise.

Defending Sharjeel Imam does not require agreeing with every argument he has made. It requires defending the right to engage with his ideas seriously, to examine them critically, and to resist the impulse to replace argument with accusation. The question is whether we are willing to confront the complexity of Muslim political thought in India, or whether we would rather consign it to a set of labels that make it easier to condemn than to understand.

F

As someone looking at this from South India, I find the spectacle of a politician performing Shastra Puja with hundreds of firearms deeply unsettling.

Raja Bhaiya, a seven time MLA from Uttar Pradesh, may have every right to practise his religious traditions. But when more than 500 firearms become part of a public display surrounding a powerful politician, an uncomfortable question arises: what exactly are we celebrating, faith, tradition or the theatre of power?

I would rather see politicians compete over schools, hospitals, scientific research, employment and public infrastructure than cultivate an image built around weapons and personal influence.

This isn't about claiming South India is superior or North India is backward. Every region has its own political failures. The problem is a political culture that can romanticise feudal power long after democracy is supposed to have replaced it.

A politician's strength should be measured by how well people live, not by how many guns surround him. Democracy needs accountable leaders, not modern day kings/thugs.

https://www.instagram.com/reel/Detwj0hOxu_/?psln=aHZkcGNlcWoydDM3

Source : https://www.instagram.com/reel/DestTewCscM/

Women reportedly confronted and drove away Bajrang Dal members who arrived at a Garba festival in Khargone, Madhya Pradesh. According to social media reports, the group objected to songs being played at the event, triggering a confrontation with the women present. The incident has sparked discussions about moral policing and the right of people to celebrate festivals without intimidation. Critics argue that cultural events should not become platforms for imposing ideological restrictions on others. The incident also highlights the importance of allowing women to make their own choices and participate freely in public celebrations without outside interference.

Imagine being so focused on recording content for social media that you overlook the potential danger your own child is exposed to.

The sea is unpredictable. Waves, currents and sudden changes in conditions can turn an apparently harmless moment into a dangerous situation within seconds.

And yet, sometimes the urge to capture the perfect video seems to take priority over paying attention to what's happening right in front of you.

Social media isn't inherently the problem. Taking pictures and making reels can be harmless fun. But when you're responsible for a child, your attention needs to be on their safety first.

At what point does the obsession with documenting every moment for social media become a serious failure of parental responsibility?

A few seconds of content aren't worth putting a child's safety at risk.

Source: https://x.com/ShivaniGupta_5/status/2112497481594626430?s=20

What would a universal, student-centered education system for India look like?

I have been thinking about what a better universal education system for India could look like. The idea is to build a system that takes responsibility not just for providing a school building, but for helping every child progress through education, receive basic support, and develop the ability to make their own decisions.

This is a broad concept, not a fully worked-out policy. I am interested in its strengths, weaknesses, costs, and practical feasibility.

1. Organize schools around educational stages

Instead of every school trying to provide every grade, schools could be organized around stages of education—for example, elementary, middle, and secondary education.

Larger towns and cities could support specialized schools for each stage, with better-equipped laboratories, libraries, sports facilities, workshops, and other resources. Smaller villages and geographically difficult areas would need a different model, particularly for younger children, where long travel distances can be a serious barrier.

The objective would be to use resources more effectively without making access to school harder.

1. Give every student a designated mentor

Every student would have a designated teacher or mentor responsible for following their educational progress over time.

Their role would go beyond classroom teaching. They would monitor attendance, identify learning difficulties, notice when a student starts falling behind, and contact the family when necessary. Where a problem requires more than a teacher can provide, the system would have counselors, special educators, social workers, and other support staff.

The aim would be to identify problems early rather than allowing a student to disappear from the education system unnoticed. This should be support, not surveillance or punishment for circumstances outside the child's control.

1. Identify ability without permanently limiting a student's future

Students should be assessed regularly to understand their strengths, weaknesses, interests, and learning needs.

This information could help with subject grouping, additional support, advanced learning, vocational options, and career guidance. However, a student's early performance should not permanently determine their future. Students should be able to change subjects or pathways as their abilities, interests, and circumstances evolve.

A key concern is avoiding a rigid hierarchy in which wealthier students are channeled toward prestigious academic routes while poorer students are pushed into vocational education prematurely.

1. Provide school meals and transport

Every student should have access to nutritious school meals, including breakfast and lunch where practical and justified by local needs. Menus should reflect nutritional requirements, regional food habits, food safety, and local availability.

Transport assistance should also be provided where distance makes school attendance difficult. The model might differ between dense cities, small towns, and rural areas rather than requiring an identical arrangement everywhere.

These services would reduce the burden on families and could help improve attendance, nutrition, and educational continuity.

1. Use a universal student ID to connect services

A student ID could connect academic records and relevant education entitlements, including meals, transport assistance, attendance records, and transitions between schools.

A payment-card component could make eligible benefits easier to administer, but the system should not require every family to have a smartphone or reliable internet access. There should be offline alternatives, strong privacy protections, and safeguards against the misuse of children's data.

Essential services should never be withheld simply because a card, database, or authentication system fails.

1. Teach responsibility alongside universal access

Free education should not mean that students have no responsibilities. As they mature, students should increasingly be expected to attend, participate, make a reasonable effort, care for shared resources, and take ownership of their learning and educational choices.

One idea I have considered is an individual education account that records the public investment made in a student's education. This could help students understand the actual cost of education and the role of public resources.

But should that account create a real repayment obligation once the student starts earning, or would financial education, civic responsibility, and perhaps voluntary contributions after financial stability achieve the same objective?

My starting point is that basic school education should remain free at the point of use. Any repayment scheme would need careful justification and protections for people facing unemployment, disability, low earnings, or other hardship. I am genuinely undecided about whether repayment is a good idea.

1. Consider the wider economic effects

A system on this scale would be more than an education expense. It could also create economic activity through:

- Demand for food from farmers, farmer-producer organizations, fisheries, dairy producers, and food processors.

- Employment for teachers, support staff, cooks, transport workers, maintenance workers, counselors, and vocational instructors.

- Opportunities for local suppliers and small businesses, provided procurement is transparent and competitive.

- Reduced household spending on essential education-related costs.

- Potential long-term gains in health, skills, productivity, and workforce participation.

These benefits should not be assumed automatically. Poor procurement can lead to corruption, and employment numbers alone do not prove that a program is worthwhile. The central objective must remain better educational outcomes and improved opportunities for children.

1. What would make the system work in practice? The difficult part is not just constructing schools; it is funding and operating them well over many years. Some questions that would need to be addressed include:

- How should funding and responsibilities be divided between the Union, states, and local governments?

- How can teacher quality, reasonable workloads, and mentor caseloads be maintained?

- How should the system accommodate disability, different home languages, migration, late entry into school, and students who need additional support?

- How can procurement, meal quality, attendance reporting, and spending be independently audited?

- How can vocational education lead to real opportunities rather than becoming a lower-status track?

- How can the system protect children's privacy while still identifying those at risk of dropping out?

Rather than implementing everything nationwide at once, the system could be piloted in a mix of urban, rural, and geographically difficult districts. Evaluation should measure learning outcomes, attendance, dropout rates, nutrition, travel time, family costs, staff workload, cost per student, and local economic effects—not just the number of schools built or students enrolled.

Questions for discussion:

1. Is organizing schools by educational stage a sensible way to improve facilities and resource use, or would the extra transitions and travel create more problems than they solve?

2. Is a designated mentor for each student practical at scale? What would a reasonable workload look like?

3. How can we assess students and offer different pathways without turning early assessments into permanent labels or reinforcing class divisions?

4. Should meals and transport be universal, targeted according to need, or a combination of both?

5. Can an education account or income-contingent graduate contribution encourage responsibility, or would it create unnecessary debt and administrative complexity? Should basic education be treated strictly as a public entitlement?

6. Could the economic benefits—local procurement, employment, household cost relief, and long-term productivity—justify some of the expense? How should those benefits be measured?

7. What is the biggest practical obstacle to implementing a system like this in India: funding, governance, staffing, social inequality, or something else?

I am not arguing that every part of this proposal is necessarily right. I am trying to think through what it would take to build an education system that combines universal access with individual support, flexible opportunities, public accountability, and progressively greater student responsibility. I would appreciate criticism, especially from people who understand education policy, public finance, school administration, or implementation at the local level.

Honestly, it is unbelievable how much the standard of Indian films have dropped. We once had films like 3 Idiots, Taare Zameen Par, Lagaan, Chak De! India and Swades. These were films that did not just entertain us but they made us think.

Today, it feels like films that are thought provoking is highly overshadowed by films that are dependant on Stardom. Maybe 12th Fail was one of the few recent examples of what a highly critical film can be.

Filmmaking is an art and not just a two hour celebration of an actor's stardom. Of course, what makes a good film is subjective. But what is the point of a movie where the lead actor effortlessly defeats everyone, never faces meaningful consequences and is practically worshipped by the narrative itself? Where is the struggle? Where is the character development? Where is the creativity? It's like oh cool look your favorite actor is walking awesomely in front of some explosion. And what is with this 50 to 60 year old actors partnered with 20 to 30 year old actresses.

Even South Indian cinema, particularly its action genre, seems increasingly preoccupied with crime, violence and overhyped heroes. Don't get me wrong, I love action movies and crime thriller, but fight sequences become so unrealistic that they are almost just cringe and I don't understand how we have an audience that seems to worship these actors the same way you worship a god. Like at this point the actors that play antagonist roles are much better than the ones playing the protoganist role.

Maybe you can say that there are still some good filmmaking left in Malayalam and Assamese but even then its like 2 or 3 good films out of 50 movies that is released in a year.

I am not saying that every film needs to be critical or realistic. Entertainment has its place. But Indian cinema has the talent and history to offer so much more than recycled plots and overhyped superstars.

I'm developing a political manifesto for a proposed party called Judgement Day Political Party (JDPP), covering national governance and a separate set of proposals for Delhi.

The manifesto explores governance transparency, accountability, economic growth, public services, law and order, institutional independence, and administrative reform.

I'm looking for critical feedback, not political endorsement.

I'd appreciate opinions on:

• Which proposals are practical, and which are unrealistic?
• Which policies could conflict with constitutional rights or existing laws?
• What economic costs or unintended consequences have I overlooked?
• Which proposals need stronger evidence or clearer implementation plans?
• What important issues are missing?

I'm open to criticism from people with different political viewpoints. Please challenge the policies and their assumptions rather than simply agreeing or disagreeing with the party's name.
Drive link:: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1fzZIvFdIaWRhrywPcpWA7rYyVKTEYI-T/view?usp=sharing

Came across this take, and honestly, there's an interesting argument here.

In India, parents often continue supporting their children well beyond the age of 18 or even graduation. They fund higher education, living expenses, healthcare, sometimes marriage, and even help them survive periods of unemployment.

For many young adults, this family support is the difference between being able to pursue a degree, prepare for competitive exams or search for a suitable job and having to abandon those opportunities just to survive.

The flip side is that this support can also come with expectations, restrictions and dependence. Not every family can afford to provide it, either. Two graduates with similar qualifications can have very different opportunities simply because one has a financial safety net and the other doesn't.

Indian parents effectively “subsidise society” by absorbing costs that might otherwise fall on public institutions or individuals.

How much does India's reliance on family support hide the actual cost of unemployment, higher education and the transition into adulthood?

And should the government do more to support young adults independently, or is family-based support an essential part of India's social structure?

Source: Instagram provoked the thought for this post.

Source of picture: https://x.com/indianexpress/status/2112233847286845759?s=46

One thing that gives me hope about Indian politics is that there are many prominent opposition leaders still seem unwilling to compromise everything for the lure of power, positions or personal benefits.

The likes of Chaddas who have sold their soul for immediate benefits, for every one chadda we’ve so many more who are not scared of the agencies.

They may not be in power, they may not have the resources or the protection that comes with being on the ruling side, but they are still willing to stand their ground.

And when investigative agencies become part of the political conversation, refusing to fall in line takes on a different meaning.

Maybe the opposition cannot win every battle, but if it can preserve its independence, honesty and courage, that matters too.

If nothing else, India might finally be getting an opposition that cannot be bought or intimidated so easily. In a democracy, that itself is worth something.

​

1/5 Sharjeel Imam has given an interview detailing his Islamist manifesto. Surprisingly, no storm has been kicked up over pronouncements that are so unapologetically anti-liberal, anti-secular, anti-democracy, anti-Constitution—in a word, anti-national.

2/5 He openly calls the Constitution fascist, labels secularism a trap, and denounces democracy as a contrivance to deny Muslims their political rights.

3/5 The piece is a litany of indictments against the liberal class. Imam rejects any difference between liberals and Hindutvadis. In his essentialist worldview, all Hindus are the same, unanimous in denying Muslims political power they claim as a divine right.

4/5 Inadvertently, Sharjeel has recognised something that liberals have been fighting shy of acknowledging: that Hindutva’s idea of India is anchored in the same “overarching nationalist framework”— that Muslims are Indians above all else.

5/5 For more, read this Opinion article by Ibn Khaldun Bharati, who looks at Islam from an Indian perspective:

Sharjeel Imam’s Islamist manifesto will be forgotten. The silence of liberals will not

Source - https://theprint.in/opinion/sharjeel-imams-islamist-manifesto-will-be-forgotten-the-silence-of-liberals-will-not/3074221/

I had uploaded a post where protestors (female) were dragged by the Delhi Police during the mass detentions.

I also covered some other topics of the same intensity, but each and every one of them got taken down by Moody's Govt.

Censorship at it's peak rn, because I have been in reddit for the last 5 years and have never seen* any reddit content being influenced by the Indian Govt in this manner, ffs.

Did anyone else also suffer from the same fate? Because I do see IT Cell people still pushing through their propaganda wherever they see fit, without any repurcussion. Yet anti BJP = Censorship.

Edit: All three images are for the same post.

Does anyone in this video look Bangladeshi?

43 lakh voters deleted. Right to vote denied for 43 lakh Karnataka voters.

Forget vote chori for a second, is there any accountability for denying a fundamental right?

Unreachable booth level officers, lack of clarity on documents needed...what else would a vote chori look like?

This is just karnataka.

Why harass old people just so BJP could win elections? Why do bhakts defend this?

Also why just delete voters ? Why not do proactive investigation on whether they are Bangladeshi? How many have been deported so far?

Population of Bangladesh is around 15 crores, total voters deleted in India is 13 crores. Does it mean entire Bangladesh is living in India?

Hi, this is a reminder that r/CriticalThinkingIndia is a space for constructive discussions and critical thinking.

No abuse, no name-calling, and no rage-baiting. Disagree as much as you want, but challenge arguments with arguments alone; do not include personal attacks. If you find personal attacks, do not engage; report.

Please put some effort into your posts. Make your point clearly, explain your reasoning, and provide evidence or sources where relevant. Low-effort posts that provoke reactions without contributing to a meaningful discussion defeat the purpose of this sub.

If you haven't already, please read our pinned post on Raising the Bar: Setting Better Standards Because YOU Deserve It.

Let's hold ourselves to a higher standard. The goal is not to win arguments, insult people, or reinforce our existing beliefs. The goal is to question assumptions, examine ideas, and improve our understanding.

Please keep this in mind while posting and commenting. Content that violates these standards will be removed.

I recently visited Venice for the Art Biennale. Towards the end of Arseanale, there is this Indian Pavillion curated by Amit Jaffer and sponsored by Nita Mukesh Ambani Cultural Center. It's a collection between five artists spread across India.

To be honest, I felt good after visiting, because to me it was a progressive image of India being projected on the global stage. But this is where I want to know what you all think, since I am no subject matter expert about pavillion or exhibits per say. Neither do I know about Amit Jaffer's works and his opinions.

The theme for this biennale was 'In Minor Keys,' coming from the musical literature, but also meaning the role of minor cultures and narratives. With this as the context, should the art have expressed the stories of our niche cultures, tribes, conflicts, challenges, traditions, etc. or what the curator did here, probably censored by the ministry of culture - 'exploring home as an emotional space' - is it critically sound enough?

This is how the curator frames the exhibit - “The pavilion explores home not as a fixed physical location, but as an emotional space carried within the self, a repository of culture, personal mythology and emotion. Using materials associated closely with Indian civilisation, the chosen artists create a singular meditation on the fragile nature of home, which is both personal and universal.”

Although, what I don't understand is, why does such endeavours need to be funded by business houses to ensure quality on the global stage? Why can't the ministry of culture with its beurocratic team come up with a saleable image of India on a global stage?

What do you all think? How should we tell the India story? Which processes and Institutions should we invoke? And how should we compress the diversity?

Source - https://indiainvenice.com/

Alert CISF personnel at Jama Masjid Metro Station of DMRC sprang into action when a passenger attempted to flee after a suspicious, dense object appeared on the XBIS screen during baggage screening.

Demonstrating quick reflexes and effective coordination, CISF personnel immediately pursued and apprehended the fleeing passenger near the exit gate.

Further examination of his belongings revealed an unidentified semi-solid substance concealed in a stitched portion of his undergarment. The passenger, who claimed to be an NRI residing in Kuala Lumpur, along with his belongings, was handed over to the police for further investigation.

The swift action and alertness of CISF personnel highlight their prompt response and commitment to ensuring metro security.

https://x.com/CISFHQrs/status/2112141825284923755?s=20

Why the CJP Phenomenon Won't Dent 2029: A Reality Check

1. History Repeats: CJP might feel revolutionary to Gen Z because it is their first real taste of political activism. But Millennials have already seen this film before. In 2011, the India Against Corruption movement led by Anna Hazare carried unprecedented momentum; countless young professionals quit their jobs to volunteer for the newly formed AAP, only to walk away disillusioned a few years later. Measured against the sheer scale and moral weight of the Jan Lokpal movement, CJP does not even command a 0.1% of that energy.

2. Bet on the Wrong Battlegrounds Education-related concerns like NEET resonate broadly because they affect families across demographic lines. In contrast, legal and administrative controversies like SIR fail to stir the wider public; outside of directly impacted groups, the issue simply lacks emotional and practical traction. The electorate has grown fatigued by repetitive rhetoric around EVMs and alleged procedural tampering.

3. Peaking Far Too Early With over two years remaining before the 2029 general elections, CJP’s momentum faces severe burnout. Youth-led, digital-first movements rarely possess the institutional stamina required for a multi-year political grind. As priorities shift toward careers, competitive exams, and daily responsibilities, sustained street-level agitation will likely fizzle out long before voters reach the polling booth.

4. Disconnected from Everyday Priorities The Jan Lokpal movement worked because it tackled an issue at the front of every citizen's mind: widespread corruption, backdropped by the 2G, Commonwealth Games, and coal scams under UPA-2. Backed by Anna Hazare’s lifelong moral stature, & an IAS magasay award winner Kejriwal alongwith heavyweights like Prashant bhushan etc that crusade felt authentic. CJP, by contrast, is completely detached from the kitchen-table issues that decide Indian elections—unemployment, local graft, land disputes, and economic security.

5. A Severe Deficit in Leadership and Credibility A political force is only as credible as its leadership. CJP's core figures lack the public track record, societal credibility, or institutional standing needed to inspire broad trust. Unresolved controversies surrounding their backgrounds, credentials, and funding leave them exceptionally vulnerable to co-optation, internal splits, and targeted opposition counterattacks.

6. The Fringe Appeal of Far-Left Ideology The hard-left framing championed by CJP appeals only to an insular, hyper-online fraction of the population. Mainstream Indian voters are aspirational and pragmatic; they have little appetite for ideological extremism that offers no constructive economic vision.

7. Stability Over Speculation Whatever legitimate critiques voters may have about the BJP’s governance, the broader national consensus values political certainty, policy continuity, and economic stability. When it comes to choosing national leadership, ordinary citizens will not gamble away that baseline stability on unproven activists.

8. Congress Circus At some point, there will be insecurity & fight on who owns the protest between congress & CJP leading to internal leadership conflicts.

Eventually CJP instead of building a credible opposition voice, will end up helping congress in some form. But eventually population may not see CJP as a viable option , eventually going back to BJP

The online videos circulating are highly misleading.

1. These so-called book stalls are set up by Communist Party of India cadre. These are not your regular book stalls.
2. These stalls openly sell/display books glorifying communist thugs like Mao Zedong. The same guy who launched an attack on India in 1962.
3. These stalls are filled with communist propaganda materials, in support of Maoists and their sympathisers.
4. These communists claim themselves as atheists, so why set up these propaganda stalls just outside Durga Puja pandals? And why don’t they put up the same during Eid and Christmas?

I grew up in Kolkata, and when I saw these stalls with pictures of thugs like Mao Zedong, it used to boil my blood. These communist stooges never cared about democracy or anything, just pushing their propaganda.

Also, why should such stalls be allowed to glorify such people? Would we allow stalls with books/photos glorifying Pervez Musharraf or Ayub Khan?

The BJP and its supporters repeatedly face criticism for circulating misleading claims, out-of-context footage, and edited videos to shape public opinion. When old footage is presented as a current event, the public is misled, communal tensions risk escalating, and genuine issues get buried under propaganda. What makes this more concerning is when elected representatives and Union Ministers amplify such claims without verifying the facts. Ordinary social media users have a responsibility to fact-check before sharing, but those holding public office have an even greater responsibility. If a Union Minister shares misleading content, the least people deserve is a correction and accountability, not silence.

Source

This is an old video from August of Indians and Pakistanis celebrating Independence Day in London.

Right wing trolls sharing this old video with a misleading claim is understandable, Because that's their job. They get paid for it. But you being a Union Minister sharing such misleading claim @KirenRijiju?

https://www.instagram.com/reel/Deq9-quTWPr/

its no secret that indians have turned to cult following version of politics (which historically always evolves into dictatorships) where WE dont care about the promises or work of govt people dont even know what a manifesto even is they just vote and follow someone over name, before the current govt atleast on upper levels there were promises being made thats completely gone now.

"if you dont vote modi hinduism will be in danger" is a large sentiment among the people.

when we talk about nazis we think nazis secretly sabotaged and infiltrated and then went on to bring regime change but thats far from it, they were supported by people, basically had a cult following of people who were ready to march on street for hitler heck die for him they used this favor and made those atrocities they committed normalized and seem moral.

today whats happening in india is similar, people are ready to beat up protestors who question the "Regime" for their favorite party, i get the politicians and media attacking because they get paid to do so but these people are not paid they are volunteers, they attack and the reason they give is this puts Hinduism in danger.

what i think is we never mass educated people about democracy, there's only a little section in grade 9th and 10th which doesnt have much importance grades wise so people rarely read it and discuss on it, indians are agaisnt the rights of other indians and there isnt even a class difference here its similar class of people.

i also notice another dumb behavior among our crowds where most of the crowd in other countries treat rich people like on levels of oligarchs as predatory ours would die to defend billionaires they almost idolize people like ambani/adani and think hardwork will make them reach there one day and its anti india to criticize them.

internet played a huge role in educating the recent gens about democracy and importance of protests and thats why we are having one today but its scary that our own people who get paid nothing and live lives that are similarly shit see us as enemies instead of holding government accountable.