Wednesday, December 30, 2009


My mind has something to say about everything. I almost compulsorily comment on things that come into my attention span. If something is happening, my own thoughts about it get generated almost automatically. Whether I know the subject or not is of least consequence.

These thoughts then start a barrage of questions in my mind. Lots of them. Some questions just evaporate in thin air and some remain in my consciousness long enough to let me google-out the answers. Of course, this spreads me thin between a huge range of subjects. From physics to geology to metaphysics, theology, history, politics, professions, businesses and so and so forth. Sometimes I think I know about so many things and then again, so little about so many.

The burst of thoughts is so much that I have to speak them out or discuss and debate with someone. Its not enough for me to know that I have a thought. I realize it becomes important for me to share these thoughts with anybody and everybody and sometimes even push a thought through a debate so much as to expect another person to accept my point of view.

And almost everytime I find myself doing this, my mind goes straight to an essay I read, during my B.Sc days in Sacred Hearts College in Ernakulam, called Arguing by Robert Lynd. It almost always brings back a shot of sanity into my mind and I become a little less pushy in my sales attempt.

However, I must point out here that the thoughts have never been created to support any specific agenda. A thought has simply emerged, more like a piece of truth on the basis of the amount of information I have with me. I think this is what gives me the conviction in my own thoughts. And this pure logic of arriving at a conclusion excites me to make others see what I see.

I look forward to this Think Pad letting me express all my thoughts as they come.


  1. You know you are the one.. I wish to fight with.. Back few days.. I was googling what my favourite columnist pritish nandy thinks about my ideal jawaharlal nehru..your blog was on top of my search's result.. I thought you must have 'pritish nandy's statement on jawaharlal nehru'.. But what did i find.. In two different blogs.. You have criticised both of them..
    Okay.. I don't say your comments were totally illogical.. You have really written well.. But i didn't understand why you felt a need to villainise such great personalities..
    Of course both are imperfect like any other damn person on this earth..both have hold public offices.. But there is no single alligation on either..
    Both have courage to speak their mind frankly.. In our great nation where 'vote-bank' are based on caste.. He publicly stated that he is an atheist..may be according to you, his foreign & industrial strategy didn't turned good.. But i tell you.. His foreign policy was world's best policy.. (more than 74 nations followed it) Only thing was chinese betrayal.. And betrayal are always unpredictable.. You can blame him for his world peace vision..but you know a person who have witnessed two world wars can not think better than that..
    Now industrial policy.. Was it his fault if goverment officers were corrupt in license distribution.. Public enterprises were inefficient.. He was good intent.. He wanted to keep a check on upper limit of production so that not just few but more and more people can reach that level..

    There are though some allegation that he had affair with lady moutbeten but chap.. Don't you think.. It was his personal affair.. His nationalism can not be questioned on such a thing.. There is one more allegation.. Partition of india and his role therein.. At that time.. Partition was the only thing which would refrain hindu-muslim riots.. Many people say.. Patel would be PM, had nehru was not greedy.. I think we should thank him for his greed.. How would we otherwise get such a great leader.. Kashmir matter was not his personal fault.. Kashmir disputes and war thereon were obvious for nations (india, pakistan, china) which had newly tasted power..

    And pritish nandy,. Do you know any other columnist in india who is bold enough to speak the situation as fiercely as Pritish nandy speaks.. His own life is full of illustrations.. So you finds his own glimps in his column.. He don't write them to justify himself but just to illustrate his own lifestyle and life experiences..

  2. Dear Ankit,

    Thank you for showing keen interest in my little piece. I can make out that you really adore Jawaharlal Nehru.

    Of course, I cannot write Pritish Nandy in the same sentence.

    My views about Nehru are not only my own, but like the post says, they are distant views of someone who was born more than a decade after his death.

    Like its natural in India, I grew up in an environment where everyone was all praises for Nehru. So I wasn't really born disliking his work. It is the later day reading and understanding of various issues concerning India and also a better understanding of leadership that has pushed me to view him the way I have in my blogpost.

    I have not made any attempt at vilifying Nehru. Nobody can really vilify him. He was afterall the first Prime Minister of Free India. Nobody becomes popular without reasons. Its just that somewhere we are unable to handle the popularity and instead of being who we are we start managing ourselves to keep our image intact. Nobody is too big for such a phenomena. It happens to all.

    My purpose for writing that post was not only to my thoughts on record but also to help people understand that India can do without creating False God. Our view of a person should be Objective. It is especially important of public figures because in the absence of that all their actions become an example to follow for the blind men.

    Now to address specific points you have raised.

    1. Votebank politics is not a necessity, its a convenience. It was convenient for Nehru and Congress to think of India in terms of smaller sub-groups. Why can't we think in terms of common goals and objectives? Do we thinks common goals and nation's objective will not energize the masses?

    2. I have no issues with him being an atheist. That's a matter of personal experiences.

    3. Foreign Policy: Either he should have stuck to his policy of non-alignment or he should have openly taken sides. While India was non-aligned, its a common knowledge that India and USSR were extremely close. So the alignment issue was bit of a hypocrisy.

    4. Chinese Betrayal: China's betrayal was visible to Sardar Patel since 1949. The betrayal didn't happen overnight. Whether the Chinese were going to betray us or not, development of infrastructure at the Borders and making provisions for adequate security were Nehru's Duty. He didn't fulfill them. Do you know that he called his own Generals - War Mongers - when they tried to warn him against China? Betrayals happen to all. But to ignore them when they are plainly visible is the mark of an Idiot.

    5. World Peace Vision: When your own house is burning, you don't run around the world for World Peace. A newly independent state surely had tonnes of work to finish at home. Also, The 1st and 2nd World War was primarily played out in Europe and the Pacific. India sent its soldiers and had few skirmishes on the Eastern Front. Let us not make that reason enough for Hilarious World Peace vision. We all know where it was coming from.

    6.Industrial Policy and Corruption: Do you know that President Dr. Rajendra prasad had written a letter raising concerns over corruption in Nehru Govt? And do you know that Nehru wrote back after three days asking the President to TALK to him rather than put such a matter on RECORD? Its a different thing that Dr. Prasad plainly asked Nehru to explain why such matters shouldn't be put on record.

    7. Sexual relationships: Like I said, my interest in these stories is only to the extent of the Spice they provide. As long as a PM is delivering, I don't care whether he's a womaniser or a drunkard. Work should happen.

    8. Partition of India: I haven't blamed him anywhere for the Partition. In fact, in my personal opinion, partition was a practical necessity of that time. It was a good decision. Jawaharlal Nehru was incapable of any such Practical, harsh decision. That credit goes to Sardar Patel.

  3. 9. Patel Vs. Nehru: That debate is only a symbol of disappointment with Nehru. People had expectations from him, and he failed miserably. beyond that expression, the Sardar Vs. Nehru debate is useless as that time has gone, deed is done, both men are dead and all remarks are hypothetical.

    10. Kashmir: I not only beg to differ from your opinion that Kashmir was not his personal fault, I would also say that if this is what you think then your understanding of Kashmir and Nehru's role in that is inadequate.

    11. Pritish Nandy: I never read Pritish Nandy. I don't care who he is. The only thing that I ever heard about him was that he never pays the people who work in his movies. Delays, cuts, sometimes even avoids. But that was over ten years ago. He's a thankless rat who became an MP without having any adequate qualities for being one because of BJP, even if that was due to his closeness to Balasaheb and that Balasaheb made a request to Pramod Mahajan on behalf of Pritish.

    If he has the guts to present his personal views, so do I. I have not made a single comment on him without substantiation. I have quoted each and every paragraph of Pritish in my post.

    Boldness shouldn't affect loyalty and intelligence. Criticism should be constructive. He has made false, baseless allegations against NDA Govt.

    At the worst, let us say my post on him is illustration of my own lifestyle and life experiences.

    But once again, thanks for sharing your views. I appreciate such healthy debates.


    Piyush Kulshreshtha