Thanks madam 🙏

சம்பளம் மட்டும் முக்கியமில்லைங்க சார். பணம் நிறைய வைத்திருப்பவர்கள் எத்தனையோ பேர் இருக்காங்க. ஆனால், அடுத்தவர்களுக்கு உதவ நல்ல மனசு வேணும் சார். அவருக்கு (உங்க மருமகனுக்கு) அந்த நல்ல மனசு இருக்குங்க சார்.

Nobody seems concerned about what is happening now. I have read three messages for this post Dr madam, (mr selvakumar, Karthikeyan R and Dinesh Dhinaa) and all focus only on the past. History matters, but we cannot ignore the present. Let us find the root causes and think of practical ways to stop these crimes.

💯

Professional Ethics 😎

History must illuminate minds, not imprison them in ideological prejudices. Madam #RomilaThapar reminds us the past demands critical inquiry, not convenient narratives. When evidence yields to political or religious agendas, history risks becoming propaganda rather than a pursuit of truth. thehindu.com/news/national/h…

When justice bows to power…,

A must read m.economictimes.com/opinion/…

Absolutely not. Please read it again; it is clearly a general statement. The car itself is irrelevant, the criticism directed at it is what matters. It has already been clarified that the vehicle belongs to her lawyer.

I see socialism and communism as two sides of the same coin, not as a political statement, but as ideologies rooted in the pursuit of economic equality and social justice.

Exactly “possessing wealth is not, by itself, proof of hypocrisy; the contradiction emerges when someone preaches equality for others while using ideology to shield their own privileges from scrutiny.” #AnilmalFarm

Communism is an ideological doctrine; communists are its adherents. Wealth alone does not invalidate ideological conviction, just as poverty does not establish ideological purity. The real question is whether one’s principles and actions are consistent. V. P. Singh, despite his considerable wealth, championed social justice and the marginalised. In my view, his commitment to egalitarian principles illustrates why an individual’s wealth alone cannot determine their ideological allegiance.

No, I respectfully disagree. Personal or inherited wealth does not, by itself, invalidate one’s commitment to communist ideology. Communism is a question of political conviction, not a certificate of poverty. Before India became a republic, many princely states acceded to the Union, surrendering their sovereign authority in the process. That historical transition should not be confused with communism, but it reminds us that political power and personal wealth are distinct questions. Ideology must be judged by one’s principles, political commitments, and actions, not merely by one’s family assets. True communism begins when we stand up for ourselves and, more importantly, for the rights and dignity of others.

💯 sir . A very well-articulated explanation of communism.

Well said

Yes, you are right. RSS rallies have taken place in Tamil Nadu before. But with Periyar and Ambedkar as our role models, Tamil Nadu must remain committed to rationalism, social justice, and equality. We must question whether such rallies align with the progressive ideals our state has long stood for.

That’s truly heartbreaking.

Kudos Tamilnadu They accomplished what they set out to achieve. Thank you @CMOTamilnadu

Being born into affluence, possessing a luxury automobile, or belonging to a political dynasty does not inherently invalidate one’s commitment to communism. #Communism is an ideological conviction, not a certificate of poverty. I often tell my students that, philosophically speaking, a baby’s first cry may be interpreted as the most rudimentary assertion of a fundamental right, the instinctive demand for nourishment, care, and survival. Although an infant is incapable of comprehending political ideology, that primordial cry symbolises an innate human need and the instinct to secure what is essential for existence. Therefore, before branding @neha_aisa Neha Bora a fraud merely because she or her family may possess an expensive car, we must learn to distinguish ideological commitment from personal affluence. Scrutinise her arguments, interrogate her actions, and expose any demonstrable contradictions in her principles. But condemning someone’s political convictions solely on the basis of their family’s wealth is intellectual superficiality, not a substantive critique of ideology.