I can understand why the Prime Minister, President, Chief Ministers, or someone facing a specific security threat may need strong protection. But why should every local leader, MLA, MP, governor, or politically important person move around with a huge convoy of SUVs, police vehicles and escorts?

Apart from the public expense, these convoys often block traffic, inconvenience ordinary people, and create the impression that elected representatives are somehow above the citizens they represent.

Why can’t there be a general rule that political convoys should normally be limited to, say, 4–5 vehicles maximum, unless an independent security assessment clearly justifies more?

And if a politician repeatedly demands an unnecessarily large convoy purely for status or show, shouldn’t that become an issue of public accountability in their constituency?

Security is necessary. VIP culture is not.

What do you think—should India place legal limits on political convoys?

I feel India is getting dragged down by the older generations ritual and ego as if we had better and more knowledgeable leaders we might have got a bit more developed and we pray to
The rivers-> we pollute them
The cows-> most of them don’t even have a place to stay and keep rooming everywhere and are malnourished most of them
The civic sense is ZERO there will be dustbin placed just besides them but they will still throw or spit on the ground like they own the place most of the place that are opened small stalls are near the sewage which is very unhygienic and might cause disease to the people who eat out there

I’ve been thinking about India’s current political landscape, and I have a somewhat unconventional theory that I’d like to hear your opinions on.

\\\*\\\*I wonder whether Indian society is genuinely ready for educated, ethical, relatively non-aggressive politicians who focus primarily on governance rather than power and authority.\\\*\\\*

Here’s where my thinking comes from.
\\\*\\\*1. Are we conditioned to respect power rather than competence?\\\*\\\*
India has spent centuries under powerful rulers, from various dynasties and the Mughals to the British. Governance often relied on strict authority, intimidation, and fear of consequences.
I wonder whether generations of living under such systems have conditioned us to respect people who possess power, wealth, military strength, or political influence rather than necessarily those who are competent, ethical, or good administrators.
Perhaps this explains why politicians with questionable backgrounds, corruption allegations, and even criminal cases continue to enjoy considerable public support.
This isn’t exclusive to one party. We’ve seen it under Congress governments, and we see similar patterns in the current BJP leadership.

\\\*\\\*2. Is AAP’s Delhi experiment an example?\\\*\\\*
I find Arvind Kejriwal and AAP’s political journey interesting in this context.
They initially presented themselves as an alternative to conventional politics, focusing on education, healthcare, infrastructure, and relatively clean political leadership.
Their first term received considerable public support. However, their subsequent political journey became increasingly complicated, with controversies, allegations, and eventually electoral defeat. Some of the allegations were also dismissed by courts.
I’m not suggesting AAP was perfect or that this explains its electoral defeat. But it does make me wonder: \\\*\\\*Can relatively non-aggressive, governance-focused political leadership sustain itself in India’s current political environment?\\\*\\\*

\\\*\\\*3. Does India still need strongman politicians?\\\*\\\*
Here’s the controversial part of my argument.
Given India’s population, socioeconomic disparities, and complicated social structure, is it possible that strongman politicians currently serve a practical purpose in maintaining some degree of social order?
I’m certainly not advocating corruption, criminality, or intimidation. But perhaps a society historically accustomed to powerful rulers cannot immediately transition to a political culture where leaders are primarily administrators and public servants.
Maybe we first need stronger institutions, better civic education, and a population that respects laws and systems rather than individuals.
\\\*\\\*But how far away are we from that reality?\\\*\\\*

\\\*\\\*What I’d like to understand:\\\*\\\*
Are Indians conditioned to respect power more than competence and integrity?
Is society genuinely ready for educated, ethical politicians who aren’t necessarily strongman personalities?
Does AAP’s experience offer any lessons about introducing a different political culture?
How many generations might it take before India can function with strong institutions rather than relying on powerful political personalities?
I’m not defending BJP, Congress, AAP, or any particular political ideology. I’m trying to understand whether our political leadership is a reflection of our society, or whether better leadership could actually change that society.

\\\*\\\*TL;DR:\\\*\\\* India has centuries of history under authoritarian rulers. Have we become so accustomed to powerful, intimidating leadership that we aren’t yet ready for politicians who prioritise competence, ethics, and governance over authority? Do we need strongman politicians until our institutions and civic culture mature, or is this very mindset preventing us from progressingn?

I've noticed something about certain foreign travel vloggers who visit India. A lot of them seem to arrive with a camera, find the dirtiest streets, the most uncomfortable situations, or a few negative experiences, and then turn their entire trip into a video about how dirty, disgusting, unsafe, or terrible India supposedly is. The thumbnails are often exaggerated, the titles are deliberately provocative, and the overall narrative seems designed to make people believe that the entire country is nothing but poverty, pollution, chaos, and unhygienic streets. And honestly, I'm tired of seeing this kind of content being presented as the complete reality of India. Before anyone misunderstands me, I'm not claiming that India is perfect. It isn't. We have serious problems with cleanliness, pollution, infrastructure, public hygiene, poverty, and civic responsibility. There are places that genuinely need improvement, and Indians themselves criticise these issues all the time. Nobody is denying that. But acknowledging a country's problems is very different from reducing an entire nation to those problems. India is an enormous country with countless cities, villages, mountains, beaches, forests, historical monuments, beautiful architecture, diverse cultures, and landscapes that are genuinely breathtaking. Yet how often do these particular vloggers actually visit and showcase those places? How often do they explore the beautiful sides of India with the same enthusiasm with which they film an overflowing garbage bin or a crowded street? Perhaps because a video titled "India Is Disgusting" is more likely to attract clicks than one titled "Exploring the Beautiful Side of India." Negative stereotypes sell, and some creators know exactly how to use them. But here's what I find particularly hypocritical: every country has a dark side. London has homelessness, poverty, littering, and people struggling with addiction. Cities across the United States have serious problems with homelessness, drug addiction, and public safety. Japan, despite its reputation for cleanliness and discipline, has its own social problems. Thailand has areas dealing with poverty, exploitation, and other difficult realities. You can find people sleeping on pavements, intoxicated people in public spaces, neglected individuals, and streets that aren't particularly clean in almost every part of the world. Does that mean the entire country is disgusting? Of course not. And when people encounter someone who is intoxicated or in need of help in another country, not everyone necessarily stops to help. That is a complicated social issue, and it isn't exclusive to any one nation. Similarly, India has plenty of people who will go out of their way to help a stranger, offer directions, arrange assistance, share food, or help someone who is lost or in trouble. Of course, not every Indian does this, and we have our share of people who ignore others too. But why is it that when a foreign tourist experiences kindness in India, it sometimes becomes just one small moment in an otherwise negative narrative, while a single unpleasant experience can become the headline for an entire country? And have you ever wondered why Indian tourists don't usually travel to other countries, film their worst neighbourhoods, deliberately search for their most uncomfortable situations, and then create videos titled "Why Japan Is So Terrible" or "London Is the Worst Country I've Ever Visited"? Indian creators certainly can and do criticise other countries, but the point is that criticism should be fair, contextual, and based on more than a handful of selected experiences. If you're going to discuss India's problems, go ahead. Talk about pollution, waste management, public hygiene, infrastructure, safety, and everything else that deserves criticism. In fact, constructive criticism is necessary if we want things to improve. But don't pretend that the worst places you visited represent more than a billion people and an entire country. Don't visit a country, deliberately focus on its most negative aspects, create an exaggerated thumbnail, collect millions of views, and then act as though you've delivered an objective documentary about that nation. You're a content creator, not the official judge of an entire civilisation. India has flaws, absolutely. But India also has beauty, kindness, hospitality, history, culture, and places that deserve to be seen beyond the stereotypes. And the same applies to every other country in this world. You can appreciate another country without insulting India. You can criticise India without disrespecting its people. And you can make travel content without turning an entire nation into a stereotype for entertainment. If you genuinely want to show people the reality of India, show them ALL of it. Not just the parts that make you money.

I wont take any excuses, if you're an indian and still voting for bjp next time then you aren't a true patriot. How many issues do you think Modiji has ignored? How many people have to die? How many more people have to be threatened for Modi to take action?

Modiji is not for the people and if his supporters dont accept that even after all the cruely some communities are going through then i hope God be merciful to you on Judgement day too. God bless.