Sunday View: The Best Weekend Opinion Reads, Curated Just for You

In his column for The Indian Express, P Chidamabaram asks why did the ruling government decide to raise a controversy over the national song now, when there are so many pressing problems that need to be discussed. He argues that it was bad enough that BJP-RSS continue to distort history—accusing the prime minister of doing so during his Parliament speech—but the disdain for India's future is unpardonable. China’s constituent bodies debate robotics, Artificial Intelligence, Machine Learning, the challenges of space, the oceans and data, and how these will profoundly transform human life on this planet. India’s Parliament should be concerned about the problems in the present that are poverty, education, healthcare, infrastructure, production of and access for all to goods and services, financial stability, trade deficit, climate change, and other knowns.P Chidambaram for The Indian ExpressIn his column for The New Indian Express, Anand Neelakantan argues that what is happening across Indian skies is not an accident but the inevitable combustion of a sector fuelled by policy hypocrisy and monopolistic arrogance. He adds that in terms of taxation, aviation is treated with the same disdain as alcohol or tobacco. It is viewed not as a critical infrastructure backbone, but as a “sin,” a luxury indulgence of the elite that must be taxed into submission.Let us dissect the anatomy of this failure. The immediate trigger was the implementation of new Flight Duty Time Limitations (FDTL). The logic is unassailable: tired pilots kill people. However, in the chaotic ecosystem of Indian aviation, logic is the first casualty. The airlines, having run their rosters on the razor’s edge of human endurance for years, threw up their hands. They did not have the pilots to support a humane roster. And how did the government respond? Did it enforce the safety norms with an iron hand? No. It bent backward.Anand Neelakantan for The New Indian ExpressIn his column for Hindustan Times, Karan Thapar argues that India’s democracy is in danger of losing an efficacious assembly that hears and reflects concerns. He suggests measures, borrowed from the House of Commons, that could substantially remedy the distrust on both sides.He recommends a Prime The first is Prime Minister’s Question Time; dedicating one day a week to an agenda decided by the Opposition; and having an independent Speaker. The first is Prime Minister’s Question Time. It’s time dedicated for the Prime Minister (PM) of the day to be questioned by the leader of the Opposition (LoP) and other MPs. It makes the former accountable, as he needs to be...The second practice we should adopt is to devote one day each week to a parliamentary agenda set by the Opposition. The government may be more reluctant to accept this but it needs to be persuaded to do so. After all, under our first-past-the-post system the majority of the country has voted for the Opposition and not the ruling party or alliance. So, if once a week they set the agenda, that’s only logical and fair.Karan Thapar for Hindustan TimesIn her column for The Indian Express, Tavleen Singh writes that there are real issues that demand a discussion in Parliament including pollution in the capital city. She adds that the debate on Vande Mataram was meaningless as the young people are aware of the history of the national song.In Delhi, there are mountains of festering garbage that exude poisonous gases into the atmosphere, and nobody has managed to do anything about this despite promised deadlines. Nobody seems able to clean the filthy water of the Yamuna despite thousands of crore rupees of taxpayers’ money being poured into “cleaning” this river. Then there is the ugly truth that most Indian cities look like slums. Why? If poorer countries in south-east Asia have managed to handle problems of urbanisation, why is it so hard for India to follow their best practices?Tavleen Singh for The Indian ExpressIn his column for Deccan Herald, TCA Ranganathan cites Nobel laureate James A. Robinson (Economics, 2024) to argue that nations prosper when they build inclusive political and economic institutions that distribute power broadly and foster innovation. He adds that though India’s model uniquely combines political decentralisation with centralised economic management, it has created stability but restricted growth.Illustratively, the United States demonstrates how decentralised institutions endure across generations. Federalism disperses authority, courts remain independent, regulators are credible, and local autonomy is strong. Leaders matter, but prosperity does not rest solely on their shoulders. The legitimacy of American leadership derives from institutions that outlast individuals, preventing power from concentrating in one place. The recent Trump-Mamdani meeting underscored this point: even a powerful president found it natural to invite the mayor-elect of New York City – several rungs below him in hierarchy – to discuss differences. Such engagement reflects institutional strength.TCA Ranganathan for Deccan HeraldIn his column for The Telegraph, Gopalkrishna Gandhi argues that India must do all it is doing to protect the Kashmir Valley from external violation and internal subversion. It must not allow Pulwama and Pahalgam to be repeated. He coins this readiness as taiyariyat. But this taiyariyat, in order to hold firm, must be buttressed in insaniyat (human-ness) and in the Kashmiriyat that the former prime minister, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, famously spoke of.Terrorism is not going to let go of its India hatred. Its aim is to frustrate our taiyariyat, insaniyat and Kashmiriyat. While our bravehearts in the defence forces maintain taiyariyat, it is the people of India who must do what one single khajur did with me, to uphold our insaniyat and Kashmiriyat, with the simple, natural, uncomplicated grace of the two gentlemen and a lady returning from pilgrimage to their home.Gopalkrishna Gandhi for The TelegraphIn his column for Hindustan Times, Abhishek Asthana writes that going by the internet, one's opinion about a movie can expose their latent misogyny, their choice at the polling booth, and reveal if they are training for an armed rebellion on Sunday mornings. He adds that in Dhurandhar, the fiery Aditya Dhar movie, the line between fact and fiction has been conveniently kept hazy in the interest of box office collections.After the state elections, the latest bone of contention is Dhurandhar. It has its clear political bias; how palatable it is depends on which side of the spectrum you sit. The progressive minority has labels (bigot, fascist, misogynist, etc), haloed mouthpieces, and clever English prose; the majority has, well, the majority. With its brute force, it bends the free market, screws the economics, and squeezes the minority out of their fancy positions of privilege. People take down their reviews; others get hate. Earlier, this majority was powerless except for polling day; now, it’s armed with the internet and there is a daily referendum.Abhishek Asthana for Hindustan TimesIn his column for The New Indian Express, Utkarsh Amitabh argues that human-AI synergy has broad economic implications as it puts humans at the forefront of making AI smarter. He adds that human contribution that now matters most is no longer basic data labelling or annotation, but guiding models to function well in real-world contexts — AI must see how experts weigh evidence, resolve ambiguity, and apply standards within their fields.The question of long-term stability often comes up. If models learn from experts, could the experts eventually lose their place? Evidence from current practice points in the opposite direction. Models shift as the world shifts. New facts appear. Norms evolve. Legal and cultural contexts change. A system that performs well at one moment can drift away from acceptable behaviour without steady human adjustment. The more capable these systems become, the more important that correction becomes, because the issues they touch carry greater consequences.Utkarsh Amitabh for The New Indian ExpressIn her column for The Indian Express, Leher Kala writes that people who identify as politically liberal have lower levels of happiness and psychological well-being than Conservatives— a demarcation which broadly applies to India too. She adds that young, liberal, working women, are the unhappiest demographic.Maybe, the secret to happiness is figuring out how to live when what we desire, and what actually is, lie frustratingly far apart. A hark back to that great Indian aphorism, “to adjust”. Where does this leave the romantic non-conformist who values truth over obedience, devoutness and determined patriotism? Despondent, for sure. The liberal must take solace in Byron’s words, that those who know the most, mourn the deepest.Leher Kala for The Indian ExpressWill Putin Now Help India Counter Trump's Bullying? All Isn't As Meets the EyeBad Data, Broken Transition: India’s Numbers Are Sabotaging Its Climate FutureToo Big, Too Broken: Indigo’s Collapse Exposes India’s Aviation RotImran Khan Vs Military: Real 'Threats' in Pakistan Ignored Amid Power StruggleHema Committee Report Lit a Spark. Don’t Let Anyone Tell You ‘Nothing Happened’

BECOME A MEMBER

Sunday View: The Best Weekend Opinion Reads, Curated Just for You

We sifted through the papers to find the best opinion reads, so you won't have to.

P Chidambaram writes: Distortion of history, disdain for future

Read Latest News and Breaking News at The Quint, browse for more from opinion

Topics: Opinion Sunday View