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?

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.

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 !

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!

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