What do you think?
Rate this book
Nehru's 97 Major Blunders
Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. —George Santayana But for a series of major blunders by Nehru across the spectrum—it would not be an exaggeration to say that he blundered comprehensively—India would have been on a rapidly ascending path to becoming a shining, prosperous, first-world country by the end of his term, and would surely have become so by early 1980s—provided, of course, Nehru’s dynasty had not followed him to power. Sadly, the Nehru era laid the foundations of India’s poverty and misery, condemning it to be forever a developing, third-rate, third-world country. By chronicling those blunders, this book highlights THE FACTS BEHIND THE FACADE. This ‘Revised, Enlarged & Unabridged, June-2018 Edition’ of the book comprises (a)123 Major Blunders compared to 97 of the first Digital Edition of July 2016; (b)over twice the matter, and number of words; and (c)exhaustive citations and complete bibliography. Blunders is used in this book as a general term to also include failures, neglect, wrong policies, bad decisions, despicable and disgraceful acts, usurping undeserved posts, etc. It is not the intention of this book to be critical of Nehru, but historical facts, that have often been distorted or glossed over or suppressed must be known widely, lest the mistakes be repeated, and so that India has a brighter future.
669 pages, Kindle Edition
Published July 27, 2016
390 people are currently reading
721 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 64 reviews
December 24, 2018
Obviously from the name of the book you can understand it is going to be one sided. Getting to know the dark side of first PM of India, the author has done justice to the same with lots and lots of facts and data points. The book makes us feel pity for india and indian citizen. It is not under the rule of british, india got tarnished internationally but more after its independence, could be well understood. The amount of research that the author has done could be understood from the facts and force with which things are stated.
The intention of the book is not to tarnish the PM but to come out as a retro on the praised individual and to understand the hind side of the person. The utter foolishness with which certain things were dealt with, is easy to comment now (being in the future) but still understanding that makes us also understand views of other countries on us. Though the book is great in realizing blunders of nehru and gandhiji, the amount of times same facts are repeated could have been avoided. Similarly blunders called out in the intial part of book were lot effective while the blunders towards the end were more like added to increase the count.
If you are a stonch believer of gandhiji and nehruji or great fan of them and firmly believe that it is because of them india got freedom the book is a must read for you. But it will be hard to digest facts and obviously the book is biased against your hero. If you are a neutral then you get to understand the side of coin which not many dare to talk about and please read book favoring the leader next to stay neutral in future. If you are a opposer of the leaders and already knew facts on them then avoid the book as this will increase your hatred on the leaders (lot lot lot more).
Go for it you will understand indian leaders, economics of india and indian independence struggle lot more.
July 7, 2020
These are blunders not in retrospect but even going by the standards of politics and options available in those times.
Extensively researched and unbiased. A comprehensive study of the policies dictated in the post independence days.
Don’t go by the count of blunders but by the contents of this book. It is very objective & argumentative in style. The author provides references from both domestic and international sources. Seems many in international level had their reservations about Mr. Nehru and could see through him. Koenrad Elst, Maxwell, Wolpert, Fischer, Perry Anderson and Walter Crocker to name a few.
The statements of international journalists and heads of states of foreign countries are actually quite “point blank” and embarrassing for us to hear as a country and yet those need to be heard if we want to correct course.
I am still rating it a 4 star because a few things could have been clubbed in 1 blunder but the author split those in multiple - may be those were blunders from multiple angels!
AGAIN - These are not blunders in retrospect, but even going by the-then existing political standards and available options.
Extensively researched and unbiased. A comprehensive study of the policies dictated in the post independence days.
Don’t go by the count of blunders but by the contents of this book. It is very objective & argumentative in style. The author provides references from both domestic and international sources. Seems many in international level had their reservations about Mr. Nehru and could see through him. Koenrad Elst, Maxwell, Wolpert, Fischer, Perry Anderson and Walter Crocker to name a few.
The statements of international journalists and heads of states of foreign countries are actually quite “point blank” and embarrassing for us to hear as a country and yet those need to be heard if we want to correct course.
I am still rating it a 4 star because a few things could have been clubbed in 1 blunder but the author split those in multiple - may be those were blunders from multiple angels!
AGAIN - These are not blunders in retrospect, but even going by the-then existing political standards and available options.
December 11, 2019
The government machinery of post-independent India and its propaganda wing was always in overdrive in beefing up the larger than life image of Jawaharlal Nehru, the country's first Prime Minister. Great adulation was heaped on him and the propagandists built up a halo around his head, thoroughly ignoring his track record as prime minister. Nehru smoothed the pathways of his daughter, Indira Gandhi, first to party leadership and then to the administration. Three generations of the Nehru family became prime ministers of India whose iron grip on power was weakened only by the unfortunate assassination of Rajiv Gandhi in 1991. The family’s influence has adversely affected the nation in myriad ways, both large and small. Sanjaya Baru, in his book ‘The Accidental Prime Minister’ informs that it is this family’s hold on power that prevents declassification of documents after the lapse of a certain time, say thirty years. This helps the polity to freely examine decisions taken in the past and learn from mistakes. This is not viable in India as even the youngest in that family would be upset by the prospect of possible skeletons tumbling out of the closet if such a rule was in place. This book is a polemic on Nehru and proves, or rather attempts to prove, that Nehru's career was trailed by an unbroken line of blunders and that his rule as the head of government was an unmitigated disaster. The term ‘blunders’ in this book is used loosely as a general epithet that include failures, neglect, wrong policies, bad decisions, despicable and disgraceful acts, usurping undeserved posts etc. Rajnikant Puranik has been a physicist, banker, software professional and has headed the IT division in several organisations. He has a M.Sc. in Physics and professional qualifications like CAIIB and PGDST.
Puranik’s moral anguish against Nehru is engendered by his disservice to the nation first as the President of the Congress party and then as the Prime Minister. India would have been on a rapidly ascending path to becoming a prosperous first-world country by the end of Nehru’s term or would surely have become so by the early 1980s had the nation not been stifled industrially by the populist, socialistic policies of Nehru and Indira. Nehru is often touted as the ‘Builder of modern India’, but the India he created was full of ‘broken-down side-lane like highways, rundown Fiats and Ambassadors, meagre Second World War armaments to take care of its security, perennial food shortages and left millions of people in grinding poverty. He laid the foundations of India's poverty and misery, condemning it to be forever a developing third-rate, third-world country. The author argues that Nehru wanted only to ensure power for himself and his family. He completely ignored primary education and brought on a series of poverty-perpetuating economic policies. This ended up in an abysmal rate of growth that is usually described as the ‘Hindu rate of growth’. The author takes exception to this and calls it the ‘Nehruvian rate of growth’.
People with middling political awareness and sense of history still adore Nehru as a great statesman and dreamer whose good intentions were thwarted by the dishonest coterie that surrounded him. Puranik states that a politician’s worth should be evaluated by the work he has done for the country and by nothing else like personal qualities or public perceptions. This book acknowledges that Nehru was personally honest, upright, knowledgeable, secular, cultured, hard-working and a man of integrity. He was courageous, popular and an unfailing nationalist. Unfortunately, he turned a blind eye against corruption by his party men, rather like Manmohan Singh. Moreover, his personal political ideology influenced his policies that eventually proved detrimental to national interests. No positive aspects of Nehru are discussed in this book and the author directs the readers to scores of such books written by sycophants and yes-men for that.
Nehru fans who are sensitive and having a low threshold for shock may better avoid this book which is in fact only a summary of his blunders. For a detailed narrative, Puranik advises the readers to go through his book, ‘Foundations of Misery: Blunders of the Nehruvian Era’. The blunders are categorised into those belonging to pre-independence era, integration of princely states, external security, internal security, foreign policy, economy, misgovernance, educational and cultural mismanagement, ill-treatment of other leaders, dynastic policies and miscellaneous. Even with all his pretensions, Nehru did not understand economics and was led by the nose by the so-called professors and experts with Leftist-Marxist inclinations and who pandered to his whims and fancies.
The author establishes the truth of his arguments with conviction and enough references from other books. The exposé of Nehru is impeccable on political blunders, but not that watertight in the case of industrial and economic sectors. The points raised on these counts are valid, but it needs more substantiation. Nehru was propped up by the undue intervention of Gandhi as a result of which he landed in the party’s presidency. Puranik makes a dressing down of Gandhi too, accusing him to be a ‘self-obsessed authoritarian harbouring an overblown self-image, with an inflated ego, believing his all-round quackery represented wide and deep knowledge and wisdom and that only he knew what was best’ (p.18). Both Gandhi and Nehru waxed eloquent on democratic principles, but scuttled majority opinion when the need arose to hoist Nehru on an unwilling Congress party. In 1929, Motilal Nehru persuaded Gandhi to intervene on behalf of his son to follow him as Congress President. In 1946, the situation was more serious. The new Congress president was sure to step in to the shoes of the prime minister of the country that was on the cusp of gaining independence. Twelve out of the fifteen state committees nominated Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel as the party president while three preferred not to suggest any name. This was in fact a unanimous endorsement for Patel, but Gandhi made Nehru the president. Gandhi's logic was queer – he knew that Patel would accept his suggestion and would work under Nehru, and he was also convinced that Nehru will not work under anybody other than himself.
Of all the categories of blunders, readers would feel that Nehru’s foreign policy was the most pitiable fiasco. It was self-defeating with a laughable Non-aligned Movement and all such moonshine which helped only for Nehru's self-posturing in international fora. Dr. B R Ambedkar termed his policy as ‘trying to solve the problems of other countries rather than of our country’. He referred the Kashmir issue to the UN under the flighty advice tendered by Lord Mountbatten, thereby internationalising it and providing a perennial headache for all his successors. While Nehru spoke against the treatment of Africans in the European colonies, in contrast, with regard to the ill-treatment of Tamils in Sri Lanka or Hindus in East Pakistan he was tongue-tied. This was actually a clever ploy because regarding Africans it required only talking while in the latter two cases, it needed action too. Nehru failed to exploit opportunities to score for the nation and instead vainly hoped for being lauded as a great statesman at the expense of the country. His largesse in agreeing to part with eighty per cent of the Indus Waters to Pakistan is a crime against the nation. The Gwadar port in Balochistan, which is the centre point of the CPEC (China Pakistan Economic Corridor), was in fact owned by Oman. They offered to sell it to India for $ 1 million after independence, but Nehru declined. Then Pakistan purchased it in 1958. The enclave would have been inconvenient for India to maintain, but still, it would have provided a rich bargaining chip over Kashmir and other pending issues. Nehru was at his foolish worst in the relations with China. Before he knew what was happening, China inflicted a humiliating defeat on the ill-equipped and ill-prepared Indian army.
Nehru and his courtiers made meticulous planning on how to retain power and devised a modus operandi to elevate his daughter to the top post. They were not bound by lofty principles and liberally indulged in shady groundwork. His pocket historians had strangely erroneous notions on how history should or should not be written. If writing of what actually happened in the past could adversely affect the present, their solution was to give it a spin. That's why India's officially sanctioned history books downplay the oppression of eight centuries of slavery under the Muslim invaders. The amount of strategy in this deft policy is matched only by his meanness in politics. Forcing Purushottam Das Tandon to resign as Congress President in 1951, Nehru himself assumed the chair for four years till 1955. In that year, he infused U N Dhebar, a nobody in politics into the mainstream to fill that post. This was only a temporary device to keep the chair warm for Indira Gandhi until 1959. While he enjoyed the two powerful positions of prime minister and party president simultaneously, he forbade the state chief ministers from continuing as provincial presidents because he was so worried that they would assume a bigger clout in the states.
This book is an excellent anthology of all that was wrong with Nehru. It accuses him as the ‘Nabob of Cluelessness’ and an ‘all-round comprehensive failure’. Moreover, he is also alleged to have possessed a faulty understanding of issues, a distorted worldview, defective grasp of national security interests and faulty policies and remedies that flowed from them. Puranik has researched almost all books that criticize Nehru. He coins the term ‘dynacracy’ (dynastic democracy) to refer to the peculiar system of administration sponsored by him. In addition to the 97 major blunders, ten more are given in the epilogue. This book is definitely driven by political interests, but the truth exposed by the author can be food for thought for ordinary readers. Lack of an index is a serious drawback for the book.
The book is highly recommended.
Puranik’s moral anguish against Nehru is engendered by his disservice to the nation first as the President of the Congress party and then as the Prime Minister. India would have been on a rapidly ascending path to becoming a prosperous first-world country by the end of Nehru’s term or would surely have become so by the early 1980s had the nation not been stifled industrially by the populist, socialistic policies of Nehru and Indira. Nehru is often touted as the ‘Builder of modern India’, but the India he created was full of ‘broken-down side-lane like highways, rundown Fiats and Ambassadors, meagre Second World War armaments to take care of its security, perennial food shortages and left millions of people in grinding poverty. He laid the foundations of India's poverty and misery, condemning it to be forever a developing third-rate, third-world country. The author argues that Nehru wanted only to ensure power for himself and his family. He completely ignored primary education and brought on a series of poverty-perpetuating economic policies. This ended up in an abysmal rate of growth that is usually described as the ‘Hindu rate of growth’. The author takes exception to this and calls it the ‘Nehruvian rate of growth’.
People with middling political awareness and sense of history still adore Nehru as a great statesman and dreamer whose good intentions were thwarted by the dishonest coterie that surrounded him. Puranik states that a politician’s worth should be evaluated by the work he has done for the country and by nothing else like personal qualities or public perceptions. This book acknowledges that Nehru was personally honest, upright, knowledgeable, secular, cultured, hard-working and a man of integrity. He was courageous, popular and an unfailing nationalist. Unfortunately, he turned a blind eye against corruption by his party men, rather like Manmohan Singh. Moreover, his personal political ideology influenced his policies that eventually proved detrimental to national interests. No positive aspects of Nehru are discussed in this book and the author directs the readers to scores of such books written by sycophants and yes-men for that.
Nehru fans who are sensitive and having a low threshold for shock may better avoid this book which is in fact only a summary of his blunders. For a detailed narrative, Puranik advises the readers to go through his book, ‘Foundations of Misery: Blunders of the Nehruvian Era’. The blunders are categorised into those belonging to pre-independence era, integration of princely states, external security, internal security, foreign policy, economy, misgovernance, educational and cultural mismanagement, ill-treatment of other leaders, dynastic policies and miscellaneous. Even with all his pretensions, Nehru did not understand economics and was led by the nose by the so-called professors and experts with Leftist-Marxist inclinations and who pandered to his whims and fancies.
The author establishes the truth of his arguments with conviction and enough references from other books. The exposé of Nehru is impeccable on political blunders, but not that watertight in the case of industrial and economic sectors. The points raised on these counts are valid, but it needs more substantiation. Nehru was propped up by the undue intervention of Gandhi as a result of which he landed in the party’s presidency. Puranik makes a dressing down of Gandhi too, accusing him to be a ‘self-obsessed authoritarian harbouring an overblown self-image, with an inflated ego, believing his all-round quackery represented wide and deep knowledge and wisdom and that only he knew what was best’ (p.18). Both Gandhi and Nehru waxed eloquent on democratic principles, but scuttled majority opinion when the need arose to hoist Nehru on an unwilling Congress party. In 1929, Motilal Nehru persuaded Gandhi to intervene on behalf of his son to follow him as Congress President. In 1946, the situation was more serious. The new Congress president was sure to step in to the shoes of the prime minister of the country that was on the cusp of gaining independence. Twelve out of the fifteen state committees nominated Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel as the party president while three preferred not to suggest any name. This was in fact a unanimous endorsement for Patel, but Gandhi made Nehru the president. Gandhi's logic was queer – he knew that Patel would accept his suggestion and would work under Nehru, and he was also convinced that Nehru will not work under anybody other than himself.
Of all the categories of blunders, readers would feel that Nehru’s foreign policy was the most pitiable fiasco. It was self-defeating with a laughable Non-aligned Movement and all such moonshine which helped only for Nehru's self-posturing in international fora. Dr. B R Ambedkar termed his policy as ‘trying to solve the problems of other countries rather than of our country’. He referred the Kashmir issue to the UN under the flighty advice tendered by Lord Mountbatten, thereby internationalising it and providing a perennial headache for all his successors. While Nehru spoke against the treatment of Africans in the European colonies, in contrast, with regard to the ill-treatment of Tamils in Sri Lanka or Hindus in East Pakistan he was tongue-tied. This was actually a clever ploy because regarding Africans it required only talking while in the latter two cases, it needed action too. Nehru failed to exploit opportunities to score for the nation and instead vainly hoped for being lauded as a great statesman at the expense of the country. His largesse in agreeing to part with eighty per cent of the Indus Waters to Pakistan is a crime against the nation. The Gwadar port in Balochistan, which is the centre point of the CPEC (China Pakistan Economic Corridor), was in fact owned by Oman. They offered to sell it to India for $ 1 million after independence, but Nehru declined. Then Pakistan purchased it in 1958. The enclave would have been inconvenient for India to maintain, but still, it would have provided a rich bargaining chip over Kashmir and other pending issues. Nehru was at his foolish worst in the relations with China. Before he knew what was happening, China inflicted a humiliating defeat on the ill-equipped and ill-prepared Indian army.
Nehru and his courtiers made meticulous planning on how to retain power and devised a modus operandi to elevate his daughter to the top post. They were not bound by lofty principles and liberally indulged in shady groundwork. His pocket historians had strangely erroneous notions on how history should or should not be written. If writing of what actually happened in the past could adversely affect the present, their solution was to give it a spin. That's why India's officially sanctioned history books downplay the oppression of eight centuries of slavery under the Muslim invaders. The amount of strategy in this deft policy is matched only by his meanness in politics. Forcing Purushottam Das Tandon to resign as Congress President in 1951, Nehru himself assumed the chair for four years till 1955. In that year, he infused U N Dhebar, a nobody in politics into the mainstream to fill that post. This was only a temporary device to keep the chair warm for Indira Gandhi until 1959. While he enjoyed the two powerful positions of prime minister and party president simultaneously, he forbade the state chief ministers from continuing as provincial presidents because he was so worried that they would assume a bigger clout in the states.
This book is an excellent anthology of all that was wrong with Nehru. It accuses him as the ‘Nabob of Cluelessness’ and an ‘all-round comprehensive failure’. Moreover, he is also alleged to have possessed a faulty understanding of issues, a distorted worldview, defective grasp of national security interests and faulty policies and remedies that flowed from them. Puranik has researched almost all books that criticize Nehru. He coins the term ‘dynacracy’ (dynastic democracy) to refer to the peculiar system of administration sponsored by him. In addition to the 97 major blunders, ten more are given in the epilogue. This book is definitely driven by political interests, but the truth exposed by the author can be food for thought for ordinary readers. Lack of an index is a serious drawback for the book.
The book is highly recommended.
August 17, 2017
‘Nabob of Cluelessness’.
Can a country attain greatness even if its leaders are Lilliputs; and vice versa, can the country's leaders be considered great even if the country goes to dogs—or remains wretchedly poor and achieves only a fraction of what it could have?
Rather than a dreamer or an idealist, Nehru was indeed, as someone has said, a ‘Nabob of Cluelessness’.
We might have seen many state sponsored, left propagated and spineless sycophants fictitious works eulogies~ing the fondly referred chachaji. But this book seemed to focus on his blunders.
A must read for everyone who want to know some actual incidents.
Can a country attain greatness even if its leaders are Lilliputs; and vice versa, can the country's leaders be considered great even if the country goes to dogs—or remains wretchedly poor and achieves only a fraction of what it could have?
Rather than a dreamer or an idealist, Nehru was indeed, as someone has said, a ‘Nabob of Cluelessness’.
We might have seen many state sponsored, left propagated and spineless sycophants fictitious works eulogies~ing the fondly referred chachaji. But this book seemed to focus on his blunders.
A must read for everyone who want to know some actual incidents.
September 11, 2020
Tells the part of the history that no one actually talks about...
April 5, 2019
Anguished and felt pity for our Country after reading this. The man who collapsed and damaged the left over fortunes of our country after British Rule.
June 24, 2017
It's India's unfortunate that he becomes our first PM and spoil everything...Sardar was the right for top spot
October 16, 2017
The author left no stone unturned to make Nehru the greatest villain of Indian democracy; and to a large extent I agree with the author.
Nehru is the root cause of Kashmir issue, China issue, North-East immigration issue and lot more. He was not a great politician but an opportunist. His father Motilal Nehru started the Nehru dynasty in Indian politics and Jawaharlal actively promoted it by projecting his sister Vijaylakhsmi Pandit & daughter Indira Gandhi for highest posts in Indian politics.
J Nehru had no knowledge of foreign diplomacy, yet held the portfolio of MEA and we see the results in Kashmir, Tibet, China issues.
Alas, had Sardar Patel been the PM instead of J Nehru, India would have been a developed nation by now.
Nehru is the root cause of Kashmir issue, China issue, North-East immigration issue and lot more. He was not a great politician but an opportunist. His father Motilal Nehru started the Nehru dynasty in Indian politics and Jawaharlal actively promoted it by projecting his sister Vijaylakhsmi Pandit & daughter Indira Gandhi for highest posts in Indian politics.
J Nehru had no knowledge of foreign diplomacy, yet held the portfolio of MEA and we see the results in Kashmir, Tibet, China issues.
Alas, had Sardar Patel been the PM instead of J Nehru, India would have been a developed nation by now.
October 21, 2018
Though felt like some of the items are being repeated, yet so many things that we see today with matured sense of thinking, might not have been so prevalent back then. Yet people at high stature needs to have insights and grow beyond a person or a group. Many things to take away from this book.
September 2, 2017
This book makes an attempt to represent reason for failure of India as nation due to lack of quality leaders. When a country went to a hopeless leader like Nehru it is quite understandable that why India is still lagging behind. She has enough potential to be first world country like Singapore, South Korea, Japan but only dynasty rule destroyed an entire nation.
However, criticizing Nehru will not going to solve problem. Now, we know his blunders as described by Shri Puranik, hence, we will now judge our current and future PM on basis of these blunders.
However, criticizing Nehru will not going to solve problem. Now, we know his blunders as described by Shri Puranik, hence, we will now judge our current and future PM on basis of these blunders.
March 26, 2019
In order to glorify the Iron Man of India author has underestimated other revolutionaries like Bhagat Singh. It's based on right wing opinion, fulfilling the propaganda to rewrite the history of India.
Before starting this book i was strictly pro-Nehru but now i have some doubts. To test all the allegations i have to read some books that glorify Nehru in these parameters and will decide whether I should keep exulting our first PM or exhort vehemently like others do. 😜
P.S. author did his work very much enthusiastically.
Before starting this book i was strictly pro-Nehru but now i have some doubts. To test all the allegations i have to read some books that glorify Nehru in these parameters and will decide whether I should keep exulting our first PM or exhort vehemently like others do. 😜
P.S. author did his work very much enthusiastically.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
November 3, 2018
Great narrative writing
Its deep sorry feeling for my country after reading this book, i read this book at the time os inaguration of Sardar Patel status, it is worth spending carores and recogination to Sardar of India.
Its deep sorry feeling for my country after reading this book, i read this book at the time os inaguration of Sardar Patel status, it is worth spending carores and recogination to Sardar of India.
March 13, 2019
Eye Opening on Nehru
What a failure Nehru has been and India is still paying through due to his policies and his lineage. Had he been on other side of partition India and Sardar Patel been PM India would have definitely been one of super power.
What a failure Nehru has been and India is still paying through due to his policies and his lineage. Had he been on other side of partition India and Sardar Patel been PM India would have definitely been one of super power.
April 25, 2019
Nehru stripped naked for treachery and anti-nationalist policies. He was truly the greatest traitor ever.
Nehru stripped naked for treachery and anti-nationalist policies. He was truly the greatest traitor ever. He betrayed and tormented the true and worthy sons of the land.
Nehru stripped naked for treachery and anti-nationalist policies. He was truly the greatest traitor ever. He betrayed and tormented the true and worthy sons of the land.
September 10, 2017
Excellent. Must read by Indians
October 7, 2019
Deconstructing Nehru- from Pandit to Bandit
By a wierd toss of fate, I happened to read two books back to back this past month. The Singapore Story by Lee Kuan Yew and Nehru's 97 Major Blunders by Rajnikant Puranik.
Seldom has a book shocked me enough to repeatedly stop and recover from its grave implications as the book on Nehru. Rajnikant Puranik ruthlessly and relentlessly lays before you the loss that India has suffered over 7 decades due to catastrophic blunders and democratic sins that Nehru inflicted during his tenure.
But what really made it real for me was when I juxtaposed how the dreams of my nation were aborted by the labours of one "First Prime Minister" while another "First Prime Minister" simultaneously raised his Singaporeans out of the depths of helplessness to be a strong, admired and rich country.
Every country has their fair share of bad policy makers. But those leaders that hold the mantle of being the "First Leader" of a free nation have the most herculean task: of making firm smart choices, of being resolute in adversity, of prioritising reforms that will transform their collective peoples and fulfill their destiny. And only those who have the stomach for such sacrifice and the brain for such fortitude should step up to the challenge. Alas, Nehru was not that man - his choices kept his nation of poor yet brilliant people from keeping their "tryst with destiny".
Imagine an India where there had never been a war with China, where our infrastructure was top class, our public sector minimalist and efficient, our education system progressive, our govt offices corruption-free, our countryside naxalite-free, our fellow countrymen from J&K working and living in an industrialized, modern state, our borders relatively secure, our position in the world one of admiration as a permanent member of the UN Security Council and there being a far more trusting spirit among the different religions in the country. And then you will begin to realize the scale of our loss.
And while we suffered the consequences of our first leader's decisions, there was Singapore - just across the pond leaping miles each year through carefully chosen policies, firmly implemented decisions and scientific modern mindset - bridging pretty much the same divisions, overcoming similar or worse odds with way lesser resources at their disposal than India.
These two histories teach a strong lesson: we must have the courage to ensure wise men/women lead us else suffer the indignity they thrust upon us.
By a wierd toss of fate, I happened to read two books back to back this past month. The Singapore Story by Lee Kuan Yew and Nehru's 97 Major Blunders by Rajnikant Puranik.
Seldom has a book shocked me enough to repeatedly stop and recover from its grave implications as the book on Nehru. Rajnikant Puranik ruthlessly and relentlessly lays before you the loss that India has suffered over 7 decades due to catastrophic blunders and democratic sins that Nehru inflicted during his tenure.
But what really made it real for me was when I juxtaposed how the dreams of my nation were aborted by the labours of one "First Prime Minister" while another "First Prime Minister" simultaneously raised his Singaporeans out of the depths of helplessness to be a strong, admired and rich country.
Every country has their fair share of bad policy makers. But those leaders that hold the mantle of being the "First Leader" of a free nation have the most herculean task: of making firm smart choices, of being resolute in adversity, of prioritising reforms that will transform their collective peoples and fulfill their destiny. And only those who have the stomach for such sacrifice and the brain for such fortitude should step up to the challenge. Alas, Nehru was not that man - his choices kept his nation of poor yet brilliant people from keeping their "tryst with destiny".
Imagine an India where there had never been a war with China, where our infrastructure was top class, our public sector minimalist and efficient, our education system progressive, our govt offices corruption-free, our countryside naxalite-free, our fellow countrymen from J&K working and living in an industrialized, modern state, our borders relatively secure, our position in the world one of admiration as a permanent member of the UN Security Council and there being a far more trusting spirit among the different religions in the country. And then you will begin to realize the scale of our loss.
And while we suffered the consequences of our first leader's decisions, there was Singapore - just across the pond leaping miles each year through carefully chosen policies, firmly implemented decisions and scientific modern mindset - bridging pretty much the same divisions, overcoming similar or worse odds with way lesser resources at their disposal than India.
These two histories teach a strong lesson: we must have the courage to ensure wise men/women lead us else suffer the indignity they thrust upon us.
May 9, 2020
Good writing. Brings the real Nehru out
The author could have been a little more balanced in his criticism of nehru. However, the book brings about the true characters of nehru like his Arrogance, Nepotism, Lack of knowledge etc
The author could have been a little more balanced in his criticism of nehru. However, the book brings about the true characters of nehru like his Arrogance, Nepotism, Lack of knowledge etc
May 26, 2020
BRILLIANTLY ARTICULATED
Definitely must be prescribed to every student of economics and history. Those who are true patriots of Bharat, deserve to know the truth about the first PM of India, i.e whatever remains of Bharat.
Definitely must be prescribed to every student of economics and history. Those who are true patriots of Bharat, deserve to know the truth about the first PM of India, i.e whatever remains of Bharat.
April 18, 2020
A great master piece. Very beautifully written. Has very hard truth of the dark past of India.
May 1, 2020
Book is good, provide a lot of insight. The only issue is that sometimes the content is repetitive which creates a little monotony but overall it is worth read.
September 13, 2020
It is a brilliant take on Nehru's adverse impact on India's economy, education, healthcare, internal and external security, etc. Nehru was a complete disaster for India. That this disaster was forced undemocratically by Gandhi on India was very unfortunate. He kept the nation poor and ceded lands to her neighboring countries . Millions suffered due to his clueless policies and continue to suffer even today. The book quotes liberally by contemporaries of Nehru and letters of people like Patel and Ambedkar and even Nehru's own letters to prove the point. Excellently well researched. This is a must read for everybody who has India's interests in mind.
August 30, 2020
Shocking revelations of India's first accidental undeserving prime minister. The book is filled with sources compiled along with the quotes from other relevant books. It may shock you. Must read.
March 12, 2021
Book: Nehru's 97 Major Blunders (Revised & Unabridged to 127 Major Blunders)
Author: Rajnikant Puranik
Publisher: Pustak Mahal; First Edition (1 January 2016)
Language: English
Hardcover: 232 pages
Item Weight: 250 g
Dimensions: 20 x 14 x 4 cm
Price: 317 /-
On Nehru: “…a man of echoes and mimicry, the last viceroy rather than the first leader of a liberated India.” —Malcolm Muggeridge
At the very onset, the author states that, ‘Blunders is used in this book as a general term to also include failures, neglect, wrong policies, bad decisions, despicable and disgraceful acts, usurping undeserved posts, etc.’
It is not the target of the author to be derisive of Nehru, but historical facts, that have often been fuzzy or glossed over or censored must be known extensively, lest the mistakes be repeated, and so that India has a brighter future.
Unable to extol Nehru on facts, many aficionados resort to innovative counterfactuals like: “Had it not been for Nehru India would not have remained united and secular. But for Nehru, there would have been no democracy, and the citizens would not have enjoyed freedom...”
If facts don’t help you, go by conjectures and probabilities!
What if one advanced an alternate counterfactual and argued that an alternate person (like say Sardar Patel or C Rajagopalachari or Dr BR Ambedkar) as prime minister would have made India more united, more secure, more secular and free from communalism, more democratic and much more prosperous—on way to a first-world nation by 1964!
Nehru’s leadership is inimitable not only in terms of the scarcity of achievements, or the great gap between the potential and the actuals, or a very poor show compared to other comparable nations; but in the blunders that he made.
Other leaders too commit mistakes, but Nehru can beat them all hands down.
The number, the degree, and the breadth of the Nehruvian gaffes are simply unmatched.
This book lists the Himalayan blunders committed by Nehru. The author has classified the blunder under 12 headings:
1. Pre-Independence Blunders
2. Integration of the Princely States
3. External Security
4. Foreign Policy
5. Internal Security
6. Economy
7. Misgovernance
8. Educational & Cultural Mismanagement
9. Dynacracy & Dictatorial Tendencies
10. Nehru’s World View—That Harmed India
11. Hubris, Ill-Treatment of Others
12. Even More Blunders & Related Aspects
Ask the following questions – the answers themselves would guide you towards the truth: --
1) Were the Indian borders more secure and peaceful by the end of Nehru’s tenure compared to what they were when he became the prime minister? That is, were we better off with our external security?
Ans: The answer is a big NO.
[Check Blunder#33–47]
2) Did India have all friends as its neighbours by the end of Nehru’s tenure, thanks to his reputed foreign policy?
Ans: NO. Friends like Tibet disappeared. China, a friend, became an enemy. Sri Lanka gave you no weightage. Pakistan remained an enemy. [Check Blunder#48–58]
3) Was India a more appreciated nation by 1964, thanks both to our foreign policy and our triumphs?
Ans: Regrettably, NO. It became an object of disdain, a country others overlooked, and an international drifter.
4) Was India’s internal security better by the end of Nehru’s tenure compared to that at the beginning?
Ans: Again, NO.
[Check Blunder#59–63]
5) Did poverty decrease significantly in the 17 long years of Nehru’s rule?
Ans: NO. Poverty and misery multiplied.
[Check Blunder#64–70]
6) Did India become self-reliant in food during Nehru’s tenure?
Ans: NO. Rather, it became a land of starving millions, and an international beggar.
[Check Blunder#66]
7) Did India become a decidedly industrialised nation during Nehru's tenure?
Ans: NO. India's industrial growth was actually strangled by Nehru thanks to his socialist whim and putting harsh restrictions on the private sector. Only the disgustingly incompetent public sector expanded, financed among other sources, by the British debt-repayment. Public sector became an enormous money-sink and a white elephant.
[Check Blunder#65]
8) Compared to the nations in SE Asia, did India fare better, economically?
Ans: NO. It was left far, far behind by them, even though India started off with a huge a NO. It was left far, far behind by them, even though India started off with a huge advantage.
[Check Blunder#67-68]
9) Did India emerge as an affluent nation, 17 years after independence?
Ans: Certainly not.
[Check Blunder#64–70]
10) Did the literacy rate radically improve?
Ans: NO.
[Check Blunder#79]
11) Was the blight of untouchability eliminated? Was the lot of Dalits better?
Ans: NO.
[Check Blunder#63, 75]
12) Did the minorities, including Muslims, feel more secure?
Ans: NO.
[Check Blunder#63]
13) Did criminal-justice system get better to offer justice and security to the common man?
Ans: NO. India carried on with the heartless colonial system, and in point of fact made it even worse.
[Check Blunder#71-72]
14) Did elitist babudom become service-oriented and compassionate to the poor?
Ans: NO. Among the nastiest things that happened under Nehru, heightened later under Indira, Sanjay and Rajiv, was India's Babudom: the IAS-IPS-IFS-IRS combine, those from the criminal-justice system, and the bureaucracy lower down. Babudom is very thoroughly related to socialism, poor rate of growth, continued poverty, injustice and misery. It became more fraudulent, self-seeking, uncaring and inhuman.
[Check Blunder#71–74]
15) Did sleaze and fraudulence come down in the political and the bureaucratic setup?
Ans: NO. It got worse.
[Check Blunder#73, 74]
Thus, it becomes clar that Nehru bequeathed a noxious political (dynastic and undemocratic), economic (socialistic), industrial (inefficient and burdensome public and state sector), agricultural (neglected and starved), geographic (most borders apprehensive), administrative (inept and shady babudom), historical (Marxist and Leftist buckle), educational (elitist, and no universal literacy), and cultural (no delight in Indian heritage) legacy.
Of course, quite irrespective of the fact that the balance-sheet of the Nehru-period was deep in red, it cannot be denied that Nehru meant well: it is another matter that his flawed understanding of economics, foreign affairs, external security and many more things led to policies that proved ruinous for India.
Also, he was well-intentioned. But, then, road to hell is often paved with good intentions!
One may say: Why sweat over Nehru? He is long gone. Long gone—physically. But, much of his thinking and policies still sadly survive. It is essential to understand that he followed a wrong path, and the nation needs to gain freedom from those ideas and forge ahead.
Among other things, this book seeks to establish that Nehru's overlong 17-year period stretching from August 1947 to May 1964 was an unmitigated disaster.
Unfortunately for the millions of Indians, particularly its poor, Jawaharlal Nehru, despite his best intentions, ended up as an all-round comprehensive failure, unwittingly laying the foundations of India’s misery. Sadly, Nehru’s dynasty, rather than retrieving India from the mess, buttressed those blighted foundations.
The author, by putting forward a series of arguments and counterarguments, brings home the point that Nehru was a disaster for the nation in almost every way conceivable.
And he left behind a corrupt, cronyist, decaying Stalinist ideology. Upon investigation, it is hard to escape the conclusion that Nehru was pretty much wrong about practically everything.
Probably he had good intentions, but the results were definitely wanting.
Clearly, India nation has paid a very big price for believing in Nehru—we gave him our explicit trust, and he turned out to be, at best, only partly worthy of it.
Author: Rajnikant Puranik
Publisher: Pustak Mahal; First Edition (1 January 2016)
Language: English
Hardcover: 232 pages
Item Weight: 250 g
Dimensions: 20 x 14 x 4 cm
Price: 317 /-
On Nehru: “…a man of echoes and mimicry, the last viceroy rather than the first leader of a liberated India.” —Malcolm Muggeridge
At the very onset, the author states that, ‘Blunders is used in this book as a general term to also include failures, neglect, wrong policies, bad decisions, despicable and disgraceful acts, usurping undeserved posts, etc.’
It is not the target of the author to be derisive of Nehru, but historical facts, that have often been fuzzy or glossed over or censored must be known extensively, lest the mistakes be repeated, and so that India has a brighter future.
Unable to extol Nehru on facts, many aficionados resort to innovative counterfactuals like: “Had it not been for Nehru India would not have remained united and secular. But for Nehru, there would have been no democracy, and the citizens would not have enjoyed freedom...”
If facts don’t help you, go by conjectures and probabilities!
What if one advanced an alternate counterfactual and argued that an alternate person (like say Sardar Patel or C Rajagopalachari or Dr BR Ambedkar) as prime minister would have made India more united, more secure, more secular and free from communalism, more democratic and much more prosperous—on way to a first-world nation by 1964!
Nehru’s leadership is inimitable not only in terms of the scarcity of achievements, or the great gap between the potential and the actuals, or a very poor show compared to other comparable nations; but in the blunders that he made.
Other leaders too commit mistakes, but Nehru can beat them all hands down.
The number, the degree, and the breadth of the Nehruvian gaffes are simply unmatched.
This book lists the Himalayan blunders committed by Nehru. The author has classified the blunder under 12 headings:
1. Pre-Independence Blunders
2. Integration of the Princely States
3. External Security
4. Foreign Policy
5. Internal Security
6. Economy
7. Misgovernance
8. Educational & Cultural Mismanagement
9. Dynacracy & Dictatorial Tendencies
10. Nehru’s World View—That Harmed India
11. Hubris, Ill-Treatment of Others
12. Even More Blunders & Related Aspects
Ask the following questions – the answers themselves would guide you towards the truth: --
1) Were the Indian borders more secure and peaceful by the end of Nehru’s tenure compared to what they were when he became the prime minister? That is, were we better off with our external security?
Ans: The answer is a big NO.
[Check Blunder#33–47]
2) Did India have all friends as its neighbours by the end of Nehru’s tenure, thanks to his reputed foreign policy?
Ans: NO. Friends like Tibet disappeared. China, a friend, became an enemy. Sri Lanka gave you no weightage. Pakistan remained an enemy. [Check Blunder#48–58]
3) Was India a more appreciated nation by 1964, thanks both to our foreign policy and our triumphs?
Ans: Regrettably, NO. It became an object of disdain, a country others overlooked, and an international drifter.
4) Was India’s internal security better by the end of Nehru’s tenure compared to that at the beginning?
Ans: Again, NO.
[Check Blunder#59–63]
5) Did poverty decrease significantly in the 17 long years of Nehru’s rule?
Ans: NO. Poverty and misery multiplied.
[Check Blunder#64–70]
6) Did India become self-reliant in food during Nehru’s tenure?
Ans: NO. Rather, it became a land of starving millions, and an international beggar.
[Check Blunder#66]
7) Did India become a decidedly industrialised nation during Nehru's tenure?
Ans: NO. India's industrial growth was actually strangled by Nehru thanks to his socialist whim and putting harsh restrictions on the private sector. Only the disgustingly incompetent public sector expanded, financed among other sources, by the British debt-repayment. Public sector became an enormous money-sink and a white elephant.
[Check Blunder#65]
8) Compared to the nations in SE Asia, did India fare better, economically?
Ans: NO. It was left far, far behind by them, even though India started off with a huge a NO. It was left far, far behind by them, even though India started off with a huge advantage.
[Check Blunder#67-68]
9) Did India emerge as an affluent nation, 17 years after independence?
Ans: Certainly not.
[Check Blunder#64–70]
10) Did the literacy rate radically improve?
Ans: NO.
[Check Blunder#79]
11) Was the blight of untouchability eliminated? Was the lot of Dalits better?
Ans: NO.
[Check Blunder#63, 75]
12) Did the minorities, including Muslims, feel more secure?
Ans: NO.
[Check Blunder#63]
13) Did criminal-justice system get better to offer justice and security to the common man?
Ans: NO. India carried on with the heartless colonial system, and in point of fact made it even worse.
[Check Blunder#71-72]
14) Did elitist babudom become service-oriented and compassionate to the poor?
Ans: NO. Among the nastiest things that happened under Nehru, heightened later under Indira, Sanjay and Rajiv, was India's Babudom: the IAS-IPS-IFS-IRS combine, those from the criminal-justice system, and the bureaucracy lower down. Babudom is very thoroughly related to socialism, poor rate of growth, continued poverty, injustice and misery. It became more fraudulent, self-seeking, uncaring and inhuman.
[Check Blunder#71–74]
15) Did sleaze and fraudulence come down in the political and the bureaucratic setup?
Ans: NO. It got worse.
[Check Blunder#73, 74]
Thus, it becomes clar that Nehru bequeathed a noxious political (dynastic and undemocratic), economic (socialistic), industrial (inefficient and burdensome public and state sector), agricultural (neglected and starved), geographic (most borders apprehensive), administrative (inept and shady babudom), historical (Marxist and Leftist buckle), educational (elitist, and no universal literacy), and cultural (no delight in Indian heritage) legacy.
Of course, quite irrespective of the fact that the balance-sheet of the Nehru-period was deep in red, it cannot be denied that Nehru meant well: it is another matter that his flawed understanding of economics, foreign affairs, external security and many more things led to policies that proved ruinous for India.
Also, he was well-intentioned. But, then, road to hell is often paved with good intentions!
One may say: Why sweat over Nehru? He is long gone. Long gone—physically. But, much of his thinking and policies still sadly survive. It is essential to understand that he followed a wrong path, and the nation needs to gain freedom from those ideas and forge ahead.
Among other things, this book seeks to establish that Nehru's overlong 17-year period stretching from August 1947 to May 1964 was an unmitigated disaster.
Unfortunately for the millions of Indians, particularly its poor, Jawaharlal Nehru, despite his best intentions, ended up as an all-round comprehensive failure, unwittingly laying the foundations of India’s misery. Sadly, Nehru’s dynasty, rather than retrieving India from the mess, buttressed those blighted foundations.
The author, by putting forward a series of arguments and counterarguments, brings home the point that Nehru was a disaster for the nation in almost every way conceivable.
And he left behind a corrupt, cronyist, decaying Stalinist ideology. Upon investigation, it is hard to escape the conclusion that Nehru was pretty much wrong about practically everything.
Probably he had good intentions, but the results were definitely wanting.
Clearly, India nation has paid a very big price for believing in Nehru—we gave him our explicit trust, and he turned out to be, at best, only partly worthy of it.
October 19, 2021
Unbiased - Rational Review
Well. It changes nothing, He is still a Moron . Infact I am thinking to raise a change.org petition for adding word "Jawaharlal Nehru" as a synonym for Moron. You cannot be this idiotic and still be a PM for such a large country. This book leaves you frustrated on many levels. I been reading this for many days. For every 10 pages i would bang my head to the wall in rage & helplessness.
All the blunders he mentioned are still burdening the country. The book maybe or may not be biased. The fact is , All the available & verifiable data is accurately matching with the blunders raised by author. If this data also cannot make you understand. You are showing symptoms of leftist parasite.
Well. It changes nothing, He is still a Moron . Infact I am thinking to raise a change.org petition for adding word "Jawaharlal Nehru" as a synonym for Moron. You cannot be this idiotic and still be a PM for such a large country. This book leaves you frustrated on many levels. I been reading this for many days. For every 10 pages i would bang my head to the wall in rage & helplessness.
All the blunders he mentioned are still burdening the country. The book maybe or may not be biased. The fact is , All the available & verifiable data is accurately matching with the blunders raised by author. If this data also cannot make you understand. You are showing symptoms of leftist parasite.
July 26, 2020
Even if half of the things mentioned in this book is true, there are enough reasons where India started going the wrong way. Maybe he never had any bad intentions for India, but they are not at all reflected on the results. But I surely agree on the part where significant figures like Sardar Patel, Bose, Bhagat Singh and many many others were not depicted the way it should have been. While reading the book, we must understand this us not about finger pointing but understanding how it all started and why do we still suffer.
May 21, 2021
"Shocking and Disturbing"
At one point while reading the book I closed it and began pacing in my garden. I spent some time anguishing and wondered whether I should continue reading or not. It was too much for me to take in. But, I decided to go on because we need to know the root cause and beginning of the issues that we are presently facing in our country, India.
Hence, I feel every Indian should read this book.
At one point while reading the book I closed it and began pacing in my garden. I spent some time anguishing and wondered whether I should continue reading or not. It was too much for me to take in. But, I decided to go on because we need to know the root cause and beginning of the issues that we are presently facing in our country, India.
Hence, I feel every Indian should read this book.
August 9, 2020
Came to know about many mistakes done by Nehru which were not highlighted till now
Writer has nicely given references to justify each and every blunder of Nehru in pre and post independent India.. many of the blunders and issues which india is still facing has some roots in decisions taken by Nehru
Writer has nicely given references to justify each and every blunder of Nehru in pre and post independent India.. many of the blunders and issues which india is still facing has some roots in decisions taken by Nehru
September 20, 2020
Extremely well written book and very readable.Author has quoted many eminent politicians to drive home the point.
May 25, 2021
1. If you are a staunch believer of Gandhi-Nehru clan, you are in for a big shock! You are going to hate the author.
2. If you are a neutral person, do read books about other leaders of that era to better understand the political scenario and to remain neutral.
3. If you are a disbeliever of the Nehru-Gandhi clan, you are going to hate them even more after reading the book.
Your call now!!
2. If you are a neutral person, do read books about other leaders of that era to better understand the political scenario and to remain neutral.
3. If you are a disbeliever of the Nehru-Gandhi clan, you are going to hate them even more after reading the book.
Your call now!!
July 6, 2020
Very well explained.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 64 reviews