Political history is filled with examples of leaders who were underestimated. Perhaps, the best-known example of such criticism was the personal judgment of socialist Ram Manohar Lohia on Indira Gandhi in the mid-1960s. Calling her a “gungi gudiya” (dumb doll), Lohia echoed a view that she lacked the political stature and independence required for national leadership. History, however, delivered a different verdict. Within a few years, Indira Gandhi not only established her authority within the Congress Party but also emerged as the central figure in Indian politics. Her leadership during the 1971 Bangladesh liberation war, leading to a military triumph over Pakistan and the birth of Bangladesh, transformed her image from a supposedly weak ‘compromise candidate’ into one of the most powerful prime ministers in India’s history.This incident signifies that political assessments are often shaped by shallow prejudices. Personal ridicule of a political leader may generate headlines but it is no substitute for serious political analysis. At the end of the day, leaders are ultimately measured by their actions, choices and ability to respond to historical challenges. It is uncertain whether current critiques of Rahul Gandhi, or of any other figure of political identity, will stand the test of time; just as Lohia’s characterisation of Indira Gandhi appears misguided in hindsight. What is certain is that democratic discourse is better served by rigorous evaluation of ideas, leadership and performance rather than personal caricature.For years, a substantial political and media narrative sought to define Rahul as an ineffective leader, disconnected from the aspirations and concerns of ordinary Indians. The term ‘pappu‘ became a shorthand in political insult, repeated so often that many felt it had become an established political reality.Rahul Gandhi’s Bharat Jodo Yatra in Bengal’s Birbhum. Photo: By arrangement.Rahul’s Bharat Jodo Yatra, which spanned several states from Kerala to Kashmir, challenged this narrative in a way that no one saw coming. The amount of public engagement was significant and showed that a large fraction of the population was willing to engage with Rahul’s message of unity, compassion and what he termed “Mohabbat ki Dukaan” as opposed to what he described as “politics driven by hate.” It transformed the political narrative around Rahul from one centred on caricature to one focused on his role as a principal opposition leader.Perhaps the most telling indication of this shift is that the once-ubiquitous derogatory label has largely faded from mainstream political debate. The experience of the Bharat Jodo Yatra illustrates that even the most ingrained political narratives can be overturned, when they come crashing into public sentiment and democratic accountability. My own perception of Rahul is not informed by television debates, social media narratives or political propaganda, but by personal experience. During the Bharat Jodo Yatra, I got to walk alongside him and have a chat. What struck me most was not a desire to lecture or persuade, but a genuine curiosity about what ordinary citizens had to say. He appeared more interested in listening than in delivering prepared speeches.Rahul Gandhi with elderly supporters during the party’s Bharat Jodo Yatra, in Hingoli district, Monday, November 14, 2022. Photo: PTI.Several incidents from the yatra remain vivid in my memory. On one occasion, a man broke through the security cordon simply because he wanted to catch a glimpse of Rahul Gandhi. Rather than reacting with irritation or alarm, Rahul called him over and met him with warmth and humility. Another time, a young man playing the manjira, a traditional Indian folk instrument, attracted his attention. Rahul stopped to speak with him. When the musician expressed his desire to take a photo with him but only had a basic mobile phone without a suitable camera, Rahul instructed a photographer to take the picture and ensured that it reached the young man. The interaction appeared entirely spontaneous, free from the choreography that often characterises modern political events.These moments might feel small, but politics is often revealed in such informal moments. They offered a glimpse of a politician comfortable with direct mass engagement, who is willing to step outside the protective distance that usually separates national leaders from citizens.Rahul’s father, former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi, was assassinated in 1991 by a suicide bomber who approached him at a public event under the pretext of meeting him. Based on this personal history, maintaining a degree of openness toward strangers in large crowds requires a lot of courage and deserves recognition, irrespective of one’s political preferences.Congress leader Rahul Gandhi during the Bharat Jodo Yatra in Narayanpet district, Telangana. Photo: PTI.PM Narendra Modi’s Mann Ki Baat is a one-way talk, with the leader addressing the nation from a microphone. Bharat Jodo Yatra presented a counter model. For months, Rahul walked among citizens, listening grievances and engaging in unscripted interactions. As someone who participated in the yatra, I left with the impression that he was curious about what people had to say, rather than making himself heard. Whether you may share his politics or not, the difference between broadcasting and listening is one which looms large in a democracy. My experience during the yatra convinced me that the popular image of Rahul, as a detached or indifferent politician, bears little resemblance to the individual I encountered on the road.Historian Ramachandra Guha’s past admiration for the former Chief Minister Nitish Kumar is well-known, portraying him as a leader capable of balancing governance with secular politics. However, Kumar’s subsequent political realignments and repeated shifts in alliances have led many to question whether that earlier optimism was justified. These developments have revealed the limitations of Guha’s political forecasting. Also read: Dynasty? Why Ramachandra Guha’s Explanation of India’s Political Transformation Falls ShortIn contrast, Rahul’s dedication to secularism has remained consistent over most of his political life. Indeed, there have been times when such a stance seemed to have electoral costs and not gains. Yet, he persisted with that position despite criticism from his political opponents.Guha wondered whether Rahul has the experience or achievements required for the role of a national leader and questioned his curriculum vitae. Rahul contested and won multiple parliamentary elections, serving as a representative in the Lok Sabha for several terms. The contrast is particularly striking when considered against PM Modi’s career trajectory. Modi had not held any office prior to becoming the chief minister of Gujarat in 2001. He progressed through party organisation and administration, not through electoral politics. It is not that one leader is better than the other; rather, the question is if Guha uses the same standards of evaluation for these two leaders. History will ultimately determine the success or failure of Rahul’s politics. But if consistency of principle remains a meaningful criterion in democratic politics, his record deserves more serious consideration than caricatures and dismissive labels. Politically, Rahul Gandhi is one of the few national leaders whose public stances remain surprisingly consistent through the decades. He has continued to champion secularism and constitutional values, even as he faced electoral backlash.Mehul Devkala is a poet, writer and an award-winning filmmaker.