Tejashwi Yadav roasted for comparing himself to Steve Jobs & Mark Zuckerberg: 'He proved that he is 9th fail'
In the video, the leader says, 'Gyaan aur shiksha alga cheez hai' (knowledge and education are two different things). He goes on to say that both Jobs and Mark Zuckerberg didn't have a degree, which is what many saw as a defensive justification for his own academic shortcomings.
However, the comparison hasn't gone over well online, and the critics were quick to point out that Steve Jobs built Apple and Zuckerberg created Facebook, while Tejashwi has built nothing of his own, aside from inheriting what some call his father Lalu Prasad Yadav's "corruption empire."
Tejashwi Yadav says 'Jobs & Zuckerberg didn't have degrees' to justify his own zero education. 😂~ One built Apple. Other built Facebook.This guy? Built nothing. Just inherited Lalu's CORRUPTION empire. Have some shame😹 pic.twitter.com/FdG5xNNpNT
Netizens slam and troll his statements, which affect his education
Amid this, an X (formerly called Twitter) post has gone viral that points out Tejaswi's statements, saying that he himself hasn't built anything aside from just inheriting his father's corrupted empire.
"Have some shame," one netizen wrote, echoing widespread sentiment on social media.
Another wrote, "9th fail comparing himself to tech legends? Full Comedy. But where is the shame 😭"
9th fail comparing himself to tech legends? Full Comedy But where is the shame 😭
"Bro literally think Harvard drop out and 9th fail is same 🤡🤡🤡. Bihar have no chance in next 50 years also," one said.
Bro literally think Harvard drop out and 9th fail is same 🤡🤡🤡. Bihar have no chance in next 50 years also
"In between, he comes up with his tit bit English that too with an accent. Something to prove?? 🤔"
'Is Steve jobs and mark Zuckerberg illiterate like tejeswi yadav who has not cleared his matrix exam also?,' one asked.
"He proved that he is 9th fail 😭😭," one added.
He proved that he is 9th fail 😭😭
A look at Tejashwi Yadav's educational qualifications
Tejashwi Yadav completed his schooling in two cities, Patna and Delhi. According to the One India report, he attended the Delhi Public School in Vasant Vihar until Class 5, and later on, he was transferred to Delhi Public School, RK Puram, Delhi.
He finished his 9th grade in 2006 and then decided to drop out of Class X to focus on pursuing a career in sports.
To stay updated on the stories that are going viral, follow Indiatimes Trending.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India.com
26 minutes ago
- India.com
Big setback for India as Donald Trump announces 25 percent tariff on India
Home News Big setback for India as Donald Trump announces 25 percent tariff on India Big setback for India as Donald Trump announces 25 percent tariff on India New Delhi: In a matter of massive setback for India, US President Donald Trump has announced 25 percent tariff on India. Notably, President Donald Trump had earlier said that India may be hit with a t New Delhi: In a matter of massive setback for India, US President Donald Trump has announced 25 percent tariff on India. Notably, President Donald Trump had earlier said that India may be hit with a tariff rate of 20% to 25% as the two countries negotiate on a trade deal ahead of an Aug. 1 deadline. For breaking news and live news updates, like us on Facebook or follow us on Twitter and Instagram. Read more on Latest India News on
Time of India
32 minutes ago
- Time of India
Saikat Chakrabarti vs Nancy Pelosi: Meet Indian-American challenging Godmother of Dem Party — in her own backyard
TL;DR Saikat Chakrabarti , ex-AOC aide and Justice Democrats co-founder, is running against Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi in California's 11th Congressional District. The Harvard-educated techie turned political organiser accuses Pelosi of refusing to adapt after Trump's re-election. His campaign, 'Mission for America,' is a policy-heavy successor to the Green New Deal — with big plans for jobs, climate, and public investment. He's betting on grassroots support in a district long dominated by Democratic royalty. In a city where even startups go to die, Saikat Chakrabarti is trying to revive something far more difficult: the soul of the Democratic Party. The 39-year-old Indian-American political organiser, best known as the architect behind Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's stunning 2018 win, has now trained his sights on a political Goliath — Nancy Pelosi, the longest-serving member of Congress from California. And yes, she's running again. 'I've decided to run against Nancy Pelosi,' Chakrabarti posted earlier this year, somewhat matter-of-factly, on X. 'I know some of you might be surprised... but she is — for her 21st term.' Pelosi, who has represented California's 11th District (essentially, San Francisco) since Ronald Reagan was president, remains a towering figure in Democratic politics. But for Chakrabarti, her endurance is exactly the problem. 'She basically made the case for how the Democrats don't really need to change,' he told local reporters, referencing Pelosi's post-2024 remarks after Donald Trump reclaimed the White House. That statement, for Chakrabarti, was a red line. If the Democrats weren't willing to course-correct after a second Trump term, then maybe it was time someone else forced the issue. The long arc from Fort Worth to Capitol Hill Saikat Chakrabarti Born to Bengali immigrant parents in Fort Worth, Texas, Chakrabarti went from Harvard computer science grad to co-founding a tech startup, to an early engineering role at Stripe, the financial giant. Then came 2016. Disturbed by the political chaos of the Trump-Clinton showdown, he joined the Bernie Sanders presidential campaign, building grassroots digital tools and witnessing the gap between Democratic messaging and working-class concerns. What followed was the co-founding of Justice Democrats, a left-wing insurgent group aimed at replacing centrist Democrats with progressive ones. Their biggest success? Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a 28-year-old bartender from the Bronx who took down 10-term Congressman Joe Crowley in 2018 — with Chakrabarti as campaign manager and later, her chief of staff. But the Capitol didn't suit him for long. He exited in 2019 amid friction with Democratic leadership, after a series of now-deleted tweets criticising moderates. One compared them to segregationists, prompting then-Speaker Pelosi to issue a rare internal warning to members: stop fighting on Twitter. The establishment didn't forget. A campaign without big donors — or safety nets Now back in San Francisco, Chakrabarti has set up shop with a policy think tank focused on climate and economic transformation, and is trying to do what many progressives dream of — take on the system from within. His campaign is anchored by the Mission for America plan — a sweeping public investment programme that blends climate action, job creation, and universal social protections. If the Green New Deal was the first draft, this is Chakrabarti's second chapter: technocratic, detailed, and unapologetically radical. 'I've talked to so many people in San Francisco who respect Pelosi,' he said. 'But they can't believe she's running again.' Critically, he's not taking money from corporate PACs, fossil fuel lobbyists, or AIPAC, relying instead on small donors and direct engagement. As of March 2025, he'd raised just under $300,000 — a David's purse next to Pelosi's $1.7 million Goliath. But Chakrabarti seems unfazed. His campaign style mirrors his politics — more Zoom calls than glad-handing, more policy briefings than Instagram reels. Why this race matters (AP Photo/Harry Hamburg, File) To be clear, defeating Nancy Pelosi in San Francisco is a long shot. She's a household name. Her district is deeply blue and deeply loyal. Even progressives who complain about the Democratic establishment tend to do so while sipping espresso in Pacific Heights cafés that fundraise for her. But Chakrabarti's bid is less about unseating Pelosi and more about challenging the Democratic status quo. He sees the party as dangerously out of touch — too slow on climate, too reliant on billionaire donors, and too comfortable with losing. His candidacy is a shot across the bow, signalling that progressive energy won't sit quietly on the sidelines — even in the party's bluest bastions. And let's not forget: Pelosi isn't just any incumbent. She's the embodiment of a Democratic era that, depending on who you ask, either held the line against Trump or failed to stop him — twice. The Subhas Chandra Bose shirt and other landmines Like many progressive stars, Chakrabarti has courted controversy. In 2019, he was criticised for wearing a T-shirt with Subhas Chandra Bose, the Indian freedom fighter. Right-wing media pounced. Chakrabarti defended it as a nod to anti-colonial resistance, but the optics stuck — and were later compounded by his social media critiques of centrist Democrats. It didn't help that some of those tweets came while he was officially employed by a sitting Congresswoman. Still, his supporters argue that the Democratic Party needs more uncomfortable truth-tellers, not fewer. What happens next? If Pelosi retires before March 2026 — a possibility some local insiders whisper about — Chakrabarti could face a very different race, likely against local heavyweights like State Sen. Scott Wiener or Pelosi's daughter Christine. If she stays in? He'll be up against a political machine three decades deep, with the donor list to match. But Chakrabarti's bet is long-term. Win or lose, he's placing a wager that San Francisco — and by extension, the Democratic Party — is ready for generational, ideological, and tactical change. Whether the voters agree is something even Silicon Valley's best algorithms can't predict. FAQ Q: Is Chakrabarti a serious threat to Pelosi? Not at the moment. Pelosi remains dominant in fundraising, name recognition, and local loyalty. But Chakrabarti's campaign could influence the political discourse. Q: What's 'Mission for America'? A comprehensive policy plan focused on clean energy, job creation, public healthcare, and economic transformation — meant as a modern successor to the Green New Deal. Q: Has he held elected office before? No. Chakrabarti has been a campaign strategist, activist, and policy thinker — not an elected politician. Q: Why is Pelosi still running? Officially, to continue serving her district. Unofficially, many believe she's trying to control her succession, possibly paving the way for her daughter or an establishment ally. Q: Could Chakrabarti become the next AOC ? Unlikely, unless lightning strikes twice. But he doesn't need to be. He just needs enough spark to remind the Democratic Party that some progressives aren't waiting for permission.
India Today
42 minutes ago
- India Today
Why RSS icon MS Golwalkar favoured Hindi as India's official language
Amidst the raging debate over a perceived imposition of Hindi on non-Hindi-speaking states, critics of the BJP claim that pushing Hindi at the cost of other languages and dialects has been one of the core agendas of the party and its ideological fountainhead, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS).A study of the works of Madhav Sadashiv Golwalkar, aka 'Guruji', reveals that the second sarsanghachalak of the RSS, who was at the helm of the organisation from 1940 to 1973 and had a foundational influence over its ideology, favoured Hindi as India's official language. Golwalkar felt that a Sanskritised version of Hindi should be used till the time Sanskrit, which he described as the 'queen of languages' and one of the 'greatest cementing factors of our national life', became a common language. He was also insistent that English, which he viewed as a relic of India's colonial past, not be a compulsory language in is central to the Hindutva project of the RSS. As Alok Rai says in his book Hindi Nationalism: 'The process of the making of modem 'Hindi' and the making of 'the Hindu community' are related in complex ways. This is not to suggest that I have found in 'Hindi' the master key to the pan-Indian phenomenon of 'Hindutva' in this century. Still, 'Hindi' offers some valuable insights into the wider phenomenon.'This is evident in the writings of Golwalkar, who was heavily influenced by European ideas of the nation state, which are based on a shared religion, national identity, language and culture. 'As a solution to the problem of lingua franca, till the time Sanskrit takes that place, we shall have to give priority to Hindi on the score of convenience. Naturally we have to prefer that form of Hindi which like all other Bharatiya languages, stems from Sanskrit and gets sustenance from Sanskrit for its future growth in all fields of modern knowledge like science and technology. It does not mean that Hindi is the only national language or that it is the oldest or richest of all our languages. In fact, Tamil is a much richer and older language. But Hindi has come to be the spoken language of a large section of our people and is the easiest of all our languages for learning and speaking,' Golwalkar wrote in his book Bunch of Thoughts (1966).'We have therefore to take Hindi in the interest of national unity and self- respect and not allow ourselves to be swept off our feet by slogans like 'Hindi imperialism' or 'domination of the North', etc Any apprehensions of encroachment for dominance over other languages by Hindi are therefore pure fiction cooked up by interested politicians. In fact, with rise of Hindi, all our sister languages also will flourish. The enemy of all our Bharatiya languages is English,' he said in the book.'In fact, all our languages, whether Tamil or Bengali, Marathi or Punjabi, are our national languages. All these languages and dialects are like so many flowers shedding the same rich fragrance of our national culture. The source of inspiration for all these has been the queen of languages, the language of gods—Sanskrit. By virtue of its richness and sacred association, it also can serve as the common medium of our national intercourse. Nor is it difficult to acquire a working knowledge of Sanskrit. Sanskrit is to this day one of the greatest cementing factors of our national life. But, unfortunately, it is not in common usage now nor do our present rulers possess the moral pride and grit to bring it into vogue,' he are some who desire that English continue as the 'lingua franca' for all time to come. Language being a living medium of human intercourse, the foreign language English is bound to bring in its English culture and English life patterns. Allowing foreign life patterns to take root here would mean the undermining of our own culture and dharma,' said Golwalkar. He described the use of English as 'just an artificial imposition that accompanied the English domination and as such must be thrown off now that we have become free'.Golwalkar was also critical of Tamil and Dravidian sub-nationalism. 'These days we are hearing much about Tamil. Some protagonists of Tamil claim it is a distinct language altogether with a separate culture of its own. They disclaim faith in the Vedas, saying that Tirukkural is their distinct scripture. Tirukkural is undoubtedly a great scriptural text more than two thousands year old,' said Golwalkar in the book. He, however, extolled Tirukkural as 'purely a Hindu text propounding great Hindu thoughts in a chaste Hindu language'.In an interview to the Organiser in December 1957, Golwalkar was asked if learning four languages—the mother tongue, Hindi, Sanskrit and English—were a too many for students. This is reminiscent of the controversy over the introduction of Hindi as a third language in schools in Maharashtra from Standard I onwards. Golwalkar replied that 'the most dispensable of the four is English. It should not be a compulsory language'.advertisementWhile speaking to reporters in April 1966 in Delhi, Golwalkar was asked if the imposition of Hindi would be detrimental to the oneness of the country. 'Well, if you think that introduction of any one of our languages is detrimental to the interests of the country, do you go to the other corollary that a foreign language is conducive? If that is not so, do we not require a language of our own for communicating our ideas and thoughts, and for mutual intercourse, which will be common to all of us throughout the country? From this point of view, Hindi is the easiest to learn and it is also already spoken and understood in various parts of the country. Therefore, we say that Hindi should be there. There is no question of posing that one language is superior to another,' he his book We or Our Nationhood Defined (1939), Golwalkar held that there is 'but one language, Sanskrit, of which these many 'languages' are mere offshoots' He added that 'even among the modern languages Hindi is the most commonly understood and used as a medium of expression between persons of different provinces'.advertisement'Thus applying the modern understanding of 'Nation' to our present conditions, the conclusion is unquestionably forced upon us that in this country, Hindusthan, the Hindu Race with its Hindu Religion, Hindu Culture and Hindu Language (the natural family of Sanskrit and her offsprings) complete the Nation concept... All those not belonging to the national i.e. Hindu Race, Religion, Culture and Language, naturally fall out of the pale of real 'National' life,' wrote the postulation of Hindi being the language of a majority of Indians has been dispelled by many, such as author and cultural activist G.N. Devy, who points out that according to the 2011 Census, the country over had 528 million Hindi language speakers. This figure combined 206.1 million people whose mother tongues had been grouped under the Hindi language as its variants. This included Bhojpuri, with over 50.5 million speakers, Chhattisgarhi (16.2 million), Kumauni (2.08 million). So, if these 206.1 million people were subtracted from the number of Hindi speakers, their numbers dropped to just around 320 million. Considering that the Census had a base of 1,210 million, this meant that barely a fourth of the population spoke Mukhopadhyay, author and journalist, who has written extensively on the Hindu right, said that the historical backdrop of the launch and growth of the RSS should be accounted for while considering its advocacy of Hindi. The RSS was founded in 1925 in Maharashtra, but towards the late 1930s, was looking at branching out. The Hindi-speaking areas were most easily accessible for the Sangh.'Then, the Indo-Gangetic plains up were witnessing intense linguistic politics over Urdu. The period also saw growing support for the two-nation theory, where Urdu was reduced to being a language of the Muslims, and Hindi that of the Hindus. The RSS found a strong connect between language, religion and culture. This gave rise to slogans of 'Hindi, Hindu, Hindustan', where Hindustan was perceived as the land of the Hindus and not as a poetic imagination,' Mukhopadhyay credo became more rooted post-Independence when debates over the national language were taking place in the Constituent Assembly, and there was an agitation in Tamil Nadu against the imposition of Hindi. It was in that period that the Bharatiya Jana Sangh, predecessor of the present-day BJP, advocated Hindi as the national the Ram Mandir agitation was a north Indian movement, with Hindi being a part of the protests and its vocabulary. But when the BJP was consciously trying to broad-base itself and expand in southern states like Karnataka, it had to step down on its insistence for Hindi. 'The promotion of Hindi remains part of the political instinct of a majority of BJP leaders, who hail from northern and western India,' said Mukhopadhyay.'It is their basic commitment, but it cannot push Hindi beyond a point to fulfil their objective of being a pan-Indian party. Hindi remains part of their idea of a collective nation, the idea that we are one in terms of religion, language and culture. The categories of religion and culture are not segregated in their minds. They see Hindi as the language of Hinduism as a culture, and not a religion,' he explained.'The RSS's 'Hindi, Hindu, Hindustan' ideal draws heavily from the European model of nationalism,' said Abhishek Choudhary, author of a two-volume biography of Atal Bihari Vajpayee. 'The Sangh Parivar opposed the linguistic reorganisation of states both in principle and practice. During the first wave of statehood movements in the early 1950s—the earliest expression of sub-nationalism in independent India—Vajpayee toured the country warning that linguistic states would lead to the fragmentation of the nation. On this issue, Hindu nationalists and conservative elements within the Congress found common ground in their support for promoting Hindi,' said to India Today Magazine- EndsTune InMust Watch
