Should Rahul Gandhi be the next PM of INDIA. (Discussion Transcript)

This was the topic of discussion on the page : Following is the transcript of the discussion.

Abhinav Mohan A straight NO! Inexperienced, incompetent, novice in politics, does nothing except speking, a childish approach, irresponsible in the usage of words. He is a model material not PM.

The Opiniator (in repy to) Abhinav Mohan Then how come the oldest and the best organised political outfit INC is projecting him as the PM candidate?

Siddharth Tiwari the problem with rahul gandhi is that he has been only projecting himself on grounds of representing youth. His take on rather complex and essential subjects like economy and national security is not very clear.. Moreover he is representing a party which is under shady clouds of criticism. the only prime ministerial candidate of 2014 polls who is able to convince the nation to resurrect the depreciating economy will have the better chances to secure majority in lok sabha.

Siddharth Tiwari Sanchit Gahlot being the India’s first family, Gandhi family has always dominated and ruled at the helm. there’s is no doubt that over the years they have developed favoritism among indian masses.having said that when the question comes, does Rahul Gandhi deserve to win 2014 polls then I distinctly stand against it. even the majority now clearly realizes that a party which itself does not follow democracy while nomination of prime ministerial candidate then how are they supposed to ensure to maintain democracy across diverse segments of our nation.. w. Even the layman can clearly see how their so called ‘favorites’ deceived them.

congress’s desperate attempts to please masses through useless and meaningless food security bill has clearly spread the word among the masses that how scared are gandhis to lose their 60 years of dominance. constitution already has schemes and measures for poverty struck crowd but the loop holes in service deliveries and front-line government have been the only reason of they being unsuccessful. this depicts the old school politics based on concept of luring. But they must realize generation has become smarter.aggression in masses against congress is beyond imaginable.

Though I am not fond of BJP either but surely I am impressed with them as Narendra modi had to prove his grounds to be BJP’s face in 2014 polls. Looking over BJP. It is well known that Vajpayee by far was the best prime minister in past two decades. his government proved to be much more effective in raising the infrastructural quotient of the nation. he connected villages to cities. So BJP does has grounds to fetch majority. positive with Modi is that he has evidences of development on his side. He promoted shrinking PSUs in Gujarat and not only stabilized them but brought them into profit making. Business community knows how favorable it will be for them to business under modi governance. the one thing which will be good to watch is how he over shadows communist issue that still gives him sleepless nights.

Good thing about this election is that we will get to know what India prefers, deserving practical candidate( read modi) or the one building on the names of forefathers and the title”Gandhi”( read rahul).

Abhinav Mohan Why do we have to consider RG to lead a party? Are we compelled to elect congress again? NM and RG are two different personalities and two different mindsets. RG is more of a foreigner who doesn’t know much about India and its needs. To lead a party and to lead a nation (a big one like India) are not the same things. You can not say that something is done in some way in some country so it will do the needful for India as well. RG isn’t the guy who has seen the real condition of India, he is like a tourist who often get attached to the poor and hungry people of India and show their sentiments. But most of the time it is temporary. He treats every problem like a cake walk, but this is not the right way to understand the seriousness of the problem. Considering his educational background, his opinions, remarks and statements do not justify his certificates. This is not America or Italy, this is India. And if he wants to follow other countries then why he wears “kurta”. He should be comfortable enough to wear suits and casuals during campaigns. If he wants to revolutionize indian politics then why is he sticking to the old methods? In my opinion, I don’t know whether he is the best person to lead congress or not, but one thing I know for sure, that Neither HE nor Congress are the best leader of India.

Abhishek Awasthi Never! he don’t deserve to be a PM.., He his not able to express his own ideas and even he emulate the stage presence of some of the big names..!! So I Support Narendra Modi  for PM..

The Opiniator (in reply to ) Siddharth TiwariAbhinav Mohan i think the answer to this question depends less on how good is NM and more on who instead of RG seems strong enough to lead the congress. Are we underestimating the potential of a person who is above the power games within the congress?

Nawab Vaibhav Tiwari a big no. he is incapable to handle to handle this post. he is just like a robot which is controlled by his mother soniya gandhi. in inc no one is capable to handle this post because every person is controlled by UPA chairperson sonia gandhi.

The Opiniator (in reply to) Nawab Vaibhav Tiwari But so is Mr. Singh and he is a PM.

The Opiniator (in reply to) Siddharth Tiwari U have a point. But with very few people who can understand economy and a majority voting in response to populist schemes, congress has a decent chance and Rahul Gandhi has the virtue of being their UNDISPUTED leader with even big stalwarts behind him.

Abhinav Mohan This is the biggest question of India. We vote for no valid reason. Giving away schemes and freebies wins the Indian hearts. Rahul Gandhi travelled through villages and rural parts of India, but what for??? Did he actually do something? No, he just gained the publicity which every politician needs. Narendra Modi, on the other hand, made Gujrat a better place to live. He never complains, but he tries to make things better. Rahul gandhi, instead complains, complains and only complains, like a child.

Abhinav Mohan Oldest doesn’t mean the best always. If the party is so organised then how come Rahul Gandhi ends up speaking against the leaders of his own party. Don’t they communicate before giving any statements in public? This is not the sign of an organised party. :

Rahul’s remarks “ Hindus could pose a “bigger threat” to democratic countries than the Jihadi terrorist group Lashker-e-Toiba, Taliban or al-Queada”.

Rahul’s statements reflect a sick mindset and is part of a long standing tradition from Nehru onwards of blaming things for almost everything that goes wrong in India.

Rahul has given one face-to-face on-record interview in 2005. He said he could have been prime minister at 25 if he wanted. ….. Really so?????

A Congressman was asked why the party wasn’t bringing forward the smarter sibling, Priyanka??? “Then what will happen to Rahul ji?” he asked.

Faiz Syed The question should be “why should rahul gandhi be the Prime Minister of India ?”. It’s inevitable that Congress will comeback to power (they have a good chance even this time) and when they’ll be back, the “YUVRAJ” will definitely be the prime minister. He shouldn’t though, he hasn’t done anything other than losing elections in which he campaigned. There are so many others more deserving candidates in the Congress itself.

Abhinav Mohan Economy of India has always been put to test by Congress. I can’t figure out why it has always been so, that whenever congress came into power inflation rates start to imitate a rocket’s speed? 

Rs.1.86 lakh crore coal scam, 2012
Rs 1.76 lakh crore 2G Scam, 2009
Rs 3,600 crore Chopper Scam, 2012
2.2 Billion Dollar Swiss Bank statistics of 2010 maintained by Indian congress leaders.
That is a small part that came into knowledge.

Siddharth Tiwari actually this is one side of the story. BJP also isnt clean on corruption. read the famous tahelka outbreak on BJPs government. No government on any part of the world can boast of clean corruption free governance, not even the US. The thing is when sprinkling water on plants few drops are bound to fall on grounds. what matters is how much reaches the plant. crisis emerges when drops fallen on grounds become higher than reaching plants.


Can and Should Drinking be linked with Morality?

This was the topic of discussion on my facebook page

This is what I have to say on the topic followed by what other participants said.

To answer the above question it is necessary to define morality. Morality in itself is a philosophical concept and can be very subjective. But I think morality is the ability to draw line between right and wrong and to stay on the right side. Morality varies across cultures. Killing an animal for its meat is considered right in some cultures and wrong in some. Drinking in itself is an act which is neither right nor wrong. But if morality is the ability to differentiate between right and wrong, then it depends on a sound mind. So, anything that has the ability to make the mind, less sound or unsound has the ability to blur the line between right and wrong. And alcohol is known to have the power to blunt the mental agility. So logically there is a direct link between alcohol and morality. Probably this is the reason why we discourage children from drinking and even in the liberal US the minimum age to imbibe is 21. But another fact is that we are living in times with scant regard for “right’ and ‘wrong”. Life is to be enjoyed at any cost. Anything that aids the enjoyment should be followed while the concept of morality that kills this enjoyment must be suppressed. People start hating alcohol only when it directly affects their lives adversely.

For lot of people drinking symbolizes freedom and independence, But I think drinking has the real power to enslave its consumer especially an addict. And it doesn’t differentiate between a truck driver and a big celebrity.  Drinking is a personal choice that a drinker HAS TO make in favor of the drink offered to him. I might be accused of generalising drinking but drinking itself has a history of generalising its subjects.


I remember in one interview, writer Javed Akhtar Sahab (who left drinking after being a regular drinker for long) said “I have taken all the damaging decisions of my life under the influence of alcohol.” I cannot ask and am not asking people to abstain but I choose to listen to Javed Sahab’s words of wisdom. I might be the odd one out  in the modern times  but I believe that life can be thoroughly enjoyed even without alcohol. I believe God made life beautiful to be enjoyed in senses. 🙂

Following are the other responses in the discussion: 

 Anurag Singh Chauhan Well drinking is certainly a moral as well as an social issue and it must be given some serious thought. but the question is what our society thinks about alcohol and how it is looked upon? a society consists of different people and with them comes different perspectives! one would say its bad for health and society, and indeed it is, but the effects of drinking depends more upon a persons moral behavior than on drinking itself! a moral person even after getting drunk will try to make sure he dosen’t make a mockery of himself and hurt the ethics of his society while an immoral one will certainly not care about these things!

For some its a matter of free choice and for others poison!.
A beer everyday is the newly evolved mantra for this new generation. A bottle of expensive champagne or wine is the best wedding gift, parties and even the friendship is pompously compared to wine rather than gold. in western cultures if not in india, at a bar or a club people often start their conversation with strangers by offering them a drink. and it has become common with youngsters these days. they use alcohol to celebrate after getting some good news and on the flipside they use it to cushion the effects of bad news, be it breakup(relationship) , bad marks in an exam and what not.

I agree that consumption of alcohol does lead to some negative consequences, but if it really is that bad then how on earth did it survive all these centuries?

I read about a research conducted by a group who explained the positive sides of alcohol in medicine terms and that it assists the body in many ways. wine has been proved to cure strokes, ulcers and some types of cancers apart from helping the heart if taken in appropriate amount. nonetheless, its negative side outweighs all other benefits, including the one where a person tends to lose control over himself and often engages in anti-social behavior.
Apparently alcohol can be held responsible for a lot of negativity in today’s society. for example, Road accidents when a person drinks and drive, and domestic violence.

Too much of every thing is bad, but my question is why even a moderate intake of alcohol is considered insidious? as I’ve stated above, there are certain positives of alcohol apart from enjoyment which have been generally ignored by the society at large.

As does the phrase says “EVERY COIN HAS TWO SIDES”, and so does this. if the world thinks that we are grown up enough at 18 to be considered as adults and can choose the government to run our country, the decision of whether to drink or not, what its good or bad sides and how moral it is, should also be left to us as well.

I think I just wrote an article!

P.S. Don’t Drink and Drive!

Suraj Sharma It depends on society and how it perceives it ,but to me drinking is the root cause of most of the problems that is hurting our society and why our society it is causing impediments even in societies around the world.If the watchdog of your brains leaves it’s place then GOD save you from the wrath of the Satan.Most of the heinous and horrendous crimes are committed under the influence of alcohol and it is the single most culprit in spreading violence against humanity

it certainly is not an insignificant issue and is a sort of menace which should have been taken care of long back but to my utter dismay it is turning into a major horror for the present society.why do you think there is a significant rise in crimes among the juveniles in recent times and it has reached to such a proportion where everyone is crying for alteration in the age of juvenile justice Act.Drinking is directly linked to morality as a person in inebriated state is more likely to obliterate moral fabric of society in more ways than one which in turn influences the society and of course health is an obvious casuality

The western world is the worst hit by alcoholism.United states alone suffers from horrendous effects of alcohol.I have never met a person who has never been in trouble because of alcohol consumption.The only thing which makes us civilized is the watchdog,a sort of mechanism that guide us to do or not to do a certain task or also restrains us from committing any atrocious act but if this mechanism is corrupted,which happens after consuming alcohol,than there is no defense mechanism within the brain to restrain us or save us from committing an act in accordance with our conscience.I have also to come across anyone who has remained moderate in drinking throughout his/her life.Regarding the medical benefit than I must say that it is a trillion or rather zillion dollar industries and medical studies are conducted throughout the world and especially in US to suit the interest of these big industries.

Alka Anuj : Very well written anurag singh chauhan . An immoral and aggressive person will use alcohol as an excuse. The pathetic state of affairs is not sue to increase in drinking, its the lack of values in our own households. We pray to lord Shiv and call Somras immoral? Hmmm …sounds hypocritical . Key is moderation and morality