@atti_cus That and the fact that any movie in the espionage genre will now be bashed by illiterate, newly-minted who believe that Chuchundhar is the be-all, end-all of cinema.
This is very specific to the discourse I'm seeing around Alpha, your larger point is obv more valid.
the questions no one is asking:
- why didn't the girl buy the ₹370 chicken biryani? where was her self respect?
- can't a guy be honest about his feelings? why equate everything with r@pe?
- before anyone comes up with 'consent' bullshit, does anyone goes to dating without one's consent? what are the formal written rules about inclusions & exclusions in dating?
- if you have so much problems with men, then why don't women as community ban premarital sex or dating? why mimic western culture when you can't handle men?
@Onestlybrutal I've heard people say with a lot of confidence that Jadeja makes soft runs only, unlike Stokes. I mean, come on, you may dislike the guy cuz he is a sanghi, sure, but let's not kid ourselves about the quality of the cricketer.
He's exactly the type of guy I imagine when somebody describes an entitled, loud and uncouth north Indian and of course his name had to be Himanshu. I can even guess the cricketer and footballer he likes
कुरुक्षेत्र में प्रदेश सरकार के आदेश पर गंभीर चोट पहुँचाने की मंशा से वाटर कैनन द्वारा मुझे व युवा कांग्रेस के साथियों को निशाना बनाया गया। इस दौरान मुझे बचाने के प्रयास करते हुए हरियाणा यूथ कांग्रेस अध्यक्ष भाई @kataria_nishit घायल हो गए।
सरकार ने अहंकार और जुल्म की हदों को पार कर दिया है। लेकिन हम ना झुकने वाले हैं, ना रुकने वाले हैं। जल्दी ही फिर से धर्मेंद्र प्रधान और HPSC के चेयरमैन के इस्तीफे के लिए छात्रों की आवाज बुलंद करेंगे। इस बार पानी के गोले नहीं, तोप के गोले ले आना, हम एक ईंच भी नहीं हिलेंगे।
"If I were the minister of culture for the world, I would make every student wiser by requiring them to travel to five continents before the age of 18."
Marjane Satrapi.
In all these years..never saw Rahul Gandhi give up, complain,blame, cry, fear, backtrack, manipulate, lie or change his ideology even for a day no matter the price pressure or pain..this strength of character..show me in one other leader, then talk nonsense about alternative
There is a lesson Indian politics keeps teaching, but many refuse to learn.
Power creates followers.
Ideology creates soldiers.
The moment power disappears, opportunists disappear with it. The slogans fade. The crowds shrink. The self-proclaimed revolutionaries start looking for their next political vehicle.
But an ideological movement survives.
For twelve long years, the Congress has faced the full force of the most powerful political machine India has ever seen. Governments, agencies, media ecosystems, billion-dollar propaganda networks, daily character assassination campaigns and endless predictions of its demise.
Yet the Congress stands.
Not because it had power.
Not because it had money.
Not because the road was easy.
It stands because it is rooted in an idea bigger than any individual, bigger than any election and bigger than any government.
An idea that fought for India’s freedom.
An idea that wrote India’s Constitution.
An idea that believes India belongs to every Indian, not just those who agree with the ruling establishment.
That is why every few years we hear the same prediction: “Congress is finished.”
And every few years reality delivers the same answer: Congress is still here.
Many parties that emerged from the Congress ecosystem spent years claiming they had discovered a superior path. Some built personality cults. Some built regional empires. Some built movements around outrage and slogans.
But the test of a political party is not how it performs when it controls the government.
The real test is whether it survives when it loses power.
That is where the difference becomes obvious.
Congress workers fought during defeats.
Congress workers fought during emergencies.
Congress workers fought when leaders were jailed.
Congress workers fought when the party was written off.
Because Congress was never just a route to power. It was a cause.
And at the centre of this fight today stands @RahulGandhi.
While others adjusted their principles according to political convenience, Rahul Gandhi chose confrontation over compromise.
He spoke about unemployment when it was uncomfortable.
He spoke about inequality when it was unpopular.
He spoke about institutional capture when others remained silent.
He spoke about social harmony when hatred was becoming politically profitable.
He paid the price for that honesty.
He was mocked.
He was abused.
He was caricatured.
He was underestimated.
Yet with every attack, his credibility grew.
Because people eventually recognise the difference between a leader chasing headlines and a leader willing to endure personal attacks for what he believes.
Today, Rahul Gandhi is not growing because of media support. He is growing despite media hostility.
He is not growing because of propaganda. He is growing because millions increasingly see authenticity where critics once tried to manufacture doubt.
And that is why the future belongs to ideological clarity, not political confusion.
The countless fragments that once broke away from the Congress family need to ask themselves a simple question:
If the objective is to defend constitutional values, social justice, secularism and democracy, why remain divided?
History does not reward fragmentation.
History rewards unity of purpose.
The Congress is not merely another opposition party. It is the original national movement from which most of these political streams emerged.
The time for experiments, egos and endless splintering is ending.
The time for coming home is approaching.
Because when the battle is truly about the soul of India, there is only one national platform with the history, ideology, organisation and leadership to take that fight across every state and every village.
The Congress survived when many expected it to disappear.
And under Rahul Gandhi’s leadership, it is not just surviving.
It is preparing for its comeback.
Guha argues that Rahul Gandhi lacks the ‘curriculum vitae’ needed for national leadership. The implication being that executive experience, administrative tenure, or international credibility of a conventional kind are the necessary prerequisites. But this standard, applied consistently, would have disqualified Nelson Mandela, who spent 27 years in prison rather than in government; would have dismissed Vaclav Havel as merely a playwright; and would have found wanting every liberation leader who built legitimacy from outside the state rather than within it. Infact, it would have disqualified Jawahar Nehru, who eventually built the foundations of new India and built it successfully so!
The CV argument is fundamentally a conservative argument: it privileges the insider, the establishment-approved, the credentialled. In a democracy being systematically hollowed out from within its institutions, the most relevant credential may be precisely the one Rahul Gandhi possesses, that is, the demonstrated willingness to resist, at personal cost, the consolidation of authoritarian power.
The Test Cricket Analyst Chatbot is live for testing 🥳!
➡️ Smith vs Root on spin friendly tracks?
➡️ Jadeja vs Stokes, the better all rounder?
➡️ Best number 4 batters of the past decade?
➡️ Top bowlers in the Border Gavaskar series?
Here's what I want from you guys 👇🏻