He knew it from the beginning, his destiny was elsewhere. He was not to be confined to the ties of being a family man – call it Buddhaesque. He left his family in search of enlightenment and enrolled himself among his habitat’s most recognised ‘Band of brothers’ unit.

With time he marched on from one assignment to the other and the clarity he wished to seek was far-fetched. He met many people at various engagements, rubbed shoulders with senior members and steadily progressed through the ranks to become one the recognisable, hardworking persona brimmed with confidence with an attitude of a leader.

A mortal nevertheless, he still needed timely guidance especially when he ventured into a new breed of responsibility. A crisis erupted and he was out of his comfort zone – he wanted to do good, act well and in desperation reached out to his seniors and other colleagues working with him, to his surprise they suggested the ‘wait and watch’ approach over taking any actions.

Hindsight would teach him what not to do rather than what to do.

Both factions involved in the crisis suffered. It wasn’t the time to slogan “We didn’t start the fire” – yet the affected parties continued blaming one another. It was always burning.

He knew what was happening, however being the lead for a group meant he lost the freedom to exercise his thoughts, articulate his personal views and debating was an option turned down. He was new to the job and he didn’t explore what he didn’t know.

Silence was not the best policy – but it gave him time to introspect, live with his own thoughts when opinion makers, his opponents and the affected group(s) questioned him, ridiculed him and branded him as though he was the sole responsible person for the crisis.

They would have been better off adopting his method of introspection. Alas, they didn’t.

Seconds ticked, hours clocked by, days went by, months passed by and still he was pounded for answers. He was still in introspection slumber on the crisis and all he did was take the advice of his colleagues to not air his views.

In a couple of years, he had found peace with himself on the crisis and wanted to share his views – but people had moved on. Sooner if he didn’t, he would lose the plot again. He started to run faster, work harder than anyone else he knew. He dedicated himself to have answers when questions were asked. In other words, he came out stronger from the crisis.

However, deep down he was affected. At the remotest part of his soul, he knew he still had to vent out his views.

He was often reminded by his inner voice about younger days, his decision to move out of family, events that led him to his present. Those memories fueled him to make a difference, etch a name for himself, and bring in progress for greater good.

Success followed and there was a limit to what he had achieved in the area he was initially assigned to. It was natural to move on to the next level. He set his eyes on greater leadership roles. At the same time, his group saw the potential he had, and sailed along with him, pushed him, projected him to be the panacea of all sins that existed.

And they began building a new foundation unknown to him.

He came through convincingly purely on merit and not relying on recommendations or any sort of prejudice. He had reached the top and now he had a clear view around him. Did the clarity he was seeking many years ago came out of the blurry state?

Being ‘the’ leader was a new experience and the only way he could move forward was to learn on the job. It happens to everyone, but few admit it. Being perfect is a limitation and an illusion – he discovered this soon and hinted to his followers many times, they missed the point repeatedly.

The path ahead was not easy, and it forced him to think whether he should change his set of beliefs?

This dilemma played as he encountered acts of discord regularly. This was certainly not what he expected after getting to the top. He thought he could deliver solutions at ease. Problems piled on endlessly.

That’s what responsibilities can do, they allow you to re-think endlessly to come up with better solutions each day and never allows you to settle.

He often recollects the chain of events from history, of his forefathers, and of personalities from his contemporaries. This serves his appetite for introspection, to analyse whether he is taking a step forward or going backwards? and how many from his group truly believe in his cause?

He is now the senior leader, those days of consulting with the hierarchy was over. He finds his comrades are at a different level and to an extent oblivious to his beliefs and the direction he wishes to take. Slowly, many of them are branching away with their own set of plans.

He wishes to address this, however he is quickly reminded about the bigger issues at hand. They don’t realise he knows his comrades have become those issues.

A lot of his comrades and supporters believe they are fighting for him, but do they know it is not the fight he wants them to focus?

When will they listen to him? Will it be late and at what cost?

He is surrounded with many moments of uncertainties, and he is stuck whether to embrace them or ignore them. Those feelings of hope and disgust mix dis-proportionally to his deep thoughts and clouds his decisions.

And one day, he woke up to see, he is trapped. What was unknown became obvious. He allowed his comrades to build a fortress of solitude around him.

Was this the reason he left his family at a young age? Is this how he envisions his future life?

There is no right or wrong time in making decisions. Similarly, there is no right or wrong moves as no matter what he does, he will remain popular among those who worship him and unpopular for those who cannot stand the group he represents. He has reached that stage. But, mortal he is, he fears his inaction might haunt him even more this time around.

Should he keep quiet again and remain in that fortress and trust his comrades?

Far from the fortress, each day there is a clash of ideas even if the resultant goal is the same. Some play the moles, leaving them aside, shouldn’t ideas leaning towards the same goal be one and function like a Justice League?

The events that shaped our present cannot be altered – why are we trying so hard to change it?

In the meantime, he in his fortress and is constantly assured everything is under control. Mortal, that he is, he thinks about his legacy.

He asks how would i like to be remembered by future generations?

That’s the question he needs to answer and sooner it is, the better. He needs to re-visit those moments when he took some of the boldest decisions that shaped him. And in some scenarios, he needs to remain true to what he believes instead of merely going where the wind.

No matter, how hard he tries to create an effective pack, he will be deserted. He is a lone wolf and that’s his destiny.

If he manages to inspire the pack to follow his lead and live out his vision – it will be his legacy.


There is something about face value that attracts human responses when encountered. A sense of energy flows that resists patience and is in frenzy state to react, respond with what we feel is the right thing. Some have the ability to put it aside at the last minute, while others succumb to the seductive power of ‘hungama‘. This happened in Delhi recently and it was sensationalised as though it was a national issue – when in reality, it was meant to be dealt in a small way.

Why do we allow such incidents to become headlines? How does this issue matter to the rest of India, apart from providing fodder to unnecessary errands on social media and among friends and family.

Headlines, half-baked news, prejudices and one’s set of beliefs all play their part in that moment of expressing one’s opinion. And these days, social media offers a camouflage which gives a false sense of power.

A bunch of students decided to protest in a very immature fashion which provoked some of the fellow students who didn’t like the proceedings. The student leader steps in to diffuse the situation. He was made the prime target and even accused of not stopping the protests which didn’t have permission in the first place. At least he tried instead of keeping silent.

With regards to the protest. What has expressing opinions come down to? Aren’t there debates, forums to express views and other disagreements instead of plain sloganeering and attract attention. How do you define anti-nationalism and in this regard – a minority group of students displayed and chanted anti-India slogans. Would you isolate this group alone or take everyone who was present?

And for many, it is still not clear as to why one would start such protests in the first place? Because, majority of the Indians don’t care or are too busy caught up in daily chores. And you cannot blame them for that.

Equally puzzling and unsurprising was the reaction. First a group of student protestors, then the Delhi police, the central Government, the media, the politicians from the ruling party and to make things worse, the opposition jumping in to make this a political, privilege and a religious issue. Later, the journalists were roughed up along with other JNU students at the Patiala Court House.

Was this a great advert for the ongoing Make in India?

Humans are more prone to negativity. Try this self-exercise, you will be amazed at how we are drawn towards the dark side views over the lighter side of things.

You know it, but wait, you do not want to admit it? I get it!

How do you solve this kind of issue? At the moment, any argument against the Government or the Prime Minister is a direct way to label yourself as an anti-national? In such an environment, one loses the sense of logic or even clarity as you are dragged into the mud wrestling full of verbal duels which can get physical at times.

Violence met with violence especially when it involves youth, students – you never win!

The question that I ask myself – why are these protests in the first place? Should we ignore them as a ruling party? or should it be tackled at the foundation level?

Who would like to get to the root of things? I have a candidate, however going by the previous incidents, it would be welcome change to let go of his past silence and address students, the nation and also so called anti-nationals present in our country.

There are more positives to our Prime Minister than many of our predecessors – however, he is a human and this element is not acceptable to many. His silence over these matters is puzzling as I believe he is one person who can influence the much needed change this country needs – the ability to analyse, study both views before jumping into conclusions. The audacity to crisis communicate. Even though the rest of India is fine, the people of Delhi needs to hear those words. The students, should they continue studying?

This is an opportunity for our Prime Minister to initiate a change which many of our top leaders fail to recognise – the ability to connect with the youth. No, it is not just on social media. It is face-to-face or even through online live chats. He is an influencer and who knows, he might provide an insight that’s much needed from the top.

Our Government is taking many steps to convince countries to invest in India and one of the many things that often do not get highlighted is the fact, India is still a wonderful country despite such protests. The tussle with the Government always existed but it is more multi-folded due to social media outreach.

We need our Prime Minister to lead the nation by educating the youth consistently as it is the people that would determine the course India takes. Majority might get the votes, but they need not be always right.

In India even exceptions run into millions – so there is an option to let these protests to be ignored. But, at what cost?  

Why not we initiate a ‘getting to the roots’ programme spearheaded by our Prime Minister? Surely, there can be arrangements made to reach out to people who are in need of clarity even though they do not know it. Start with the capital.

One isn’t sure about the results. Can we not try?

P.S – How would a parent react if their son/daughter accuses them of being anti-family, make statements like ‘I prefer you weren’t alive’, talk and argue in an matured manner, doesn’t have a clue to articulate and put things in perspective, protests your decisions, so on and so forth.

How should a parent react? Will they let them rot? Will they make it worse by force and threat? Is beating them up an option? or will they try to put sense in the whole issue and inspire a change in the child?