Bharat’s youth must look beyond political theatrics and focus on building their future
Time has come for every Bharatiya, irrespective of religion, caste, language, or political affiliation, to ask a fundamental question: how long can national discourse remain trapped in confrontation when the country’s future generations are aspiring to a better life? The Constitution is not a political slogan to be invoked selectively. It is a solemn commitment that binds citizens, political parties and institutions alike.
Bharat is changing at a pace that would have seemed unimaginable a few decades ago. From space exploration and semiconductor manufacturing to pharmaceuticals, defence production, digital technology and renewable energy, the country is seeking to strengthen its capabilities and reduce strategic dependencies. Its economic rise and expanding global responsibilities have created aspirations among millions of young people. The challenge before them is to translate these opportunities into personal achievement and national progress.
The transformation of Uttar Pradesh from a state long burdened by the label of BIMARU to one pursuing ambitious development illustrates how governance, infrastructure and investment can reshape public expectations. Against this backdrop, AIMIM chief Asaduddin Owaisi’s reported remark during his recent visit to the state that the country no longer needs the Gandhis and Nehrus is politically significant. It reflects a wider question that young Bharratiyas should consider: should political legitimacy rest on inherited prominence, or on performance, accountability and the ability to deliver?
This question also applies to Rahul Gandhi and other opposition leaders. Political criticism is indispensable to democracy, but criticism must offer more than accusations, street mobilisation and constant confrontation. When political rhetoric repeatedly questions institutions without establishing its claims through credible evidence, citizens have every right to demand accountability. Opposition leaders must recognise that dissent earns public confidence through substance, not merely through volume.
The same principle applies to governments. No administration should consider itself above scrutiny, and no opposition should assume that every allegation it makes is automatically true. Constitutional institutions deserve respect, but they must also remain accountable under the law. Democracy is strengthened when disagreements are settled through evidence, debate and lawful remedies rather than through intimidation or attempts to delegitimise every institution whose decisions are inconvenient.
For Bharat’s youth, however, the more immediate question is what they gain by allowing political personalities to consume their time, energy and ambitions. Whether one admires Narendra Modi, disagrees with Rahul Gandhi, or supports another political formation, the future cannot be built by endlessly imitating political confrontations. Young people must evaluate leaders by their policies, records and results, while refusing to surrender their independent judgment to political personalities.
The shift from job-seeking to job creation deserves particular attention. Skilled workers, artisans, small traders, technology professionals, entrepreneurs and traditional family businesses all have a role in the emerging economy. A young person need not aspire only to a government position or a prestigious corporate job. With appropriate skills, access to finance, reliable infrastructure and a willingness to innovate, opportunities can emerge in manufacturing, services, agriculture, technology and local enterprise. Government schemes can help, but their benefits must be assessed against actual outcomes, accessibility and implementation.
Equally, the labels andolanjeevi and urban Naxal, used in political discourse, should not become substitutes for examining specific conduct and evidence. Peaceful protest is a constitutional freedom; violence, intimidation and unlawful conduct are separate matters that must be judged on their merits. Neither the government nor the opposition should exploit constitutional language to silence legitimate criticism or excuse unlawful behaviour.
What is even more disturbing are the videos circulated of the Congress party’s march towards the Supreme Court, reportedly after the Chief Justice of India, Justice Surya Kant, declined a meeting, citing its inappropriateness and the sub judice nature of the matter. During the march, Rahul Gandhi, the Congress dynast, was seen apparently elbowing members of his own NSUI and grabbing Karnataka Chief Minister D. K. Shivakumar by the collar to pull him back. If the footage is being interpreted correctly, such conduct is unbecoming of a leader who claims to uphold democratic values. Even more appalling was the Karnataka Chief Minister’s subsequent denial that Rahul Gandhi had roughed him up, reportedly limiting himself to advising Rahul to get into the car. Such a response raises uncomfortable questions about political subservience and the arrogance of entitlement associated with the Congress dynast.
The message from recent political confrontations should therefore be unmistakable: political leaders must exercise restraint, respect constitutional boundaries and explain how their actions improve citizens’ lives. Amit Shah’s public remarks about the NDA’s political ambitions and his appeal to the Congress and its allies to introspect underline the continuing contest for public confidence. Electoral success, however, must ultimately be determined by voters, not declared in advance by any political camp.
Yet, none can afford to dismiss the confidence of leaders like Amit Shah, who, along with Prime Minister Narendra Modi, has helped steer the BJP and its trusted allies to successive electoral victories. Those who mistake this confidence for arrogance are sadly mistaken. Modi and Shah have repeatedly demonstrated their ability to keep the Congress, which claims to be nationalist, at bay in crucial electoral battles, with Uttar Pradesh and Gujarat offering telling examples. This is a political reality that their critics cannot wish away.
Young Bharatiyas must not mortgage their future to somebody else’s political ambitions. Question every leader, examine every claim, defend constitutional freedoms and reject violence. But spend more time acquiring skills, creating livelihoods, building enterprises and contributing to society than becoming instruments in somebody else’s political battle.
Bharat’s destiny cannot be secured by governments alone, nor can it be derailed merely by political noise generated by modern-day stand-up comedians like Rahul Gandhi. Its greatest strength lies in citizens who think independently, work constructively and hold every public representative accountable. That is the kind of generation a rising Bharat needs.
