By Dr. R. Balasubramaniam

We all know them. We’ve seen them. In fact, we can’t not see them. They are everywhere — on TV panels, YouTube debates, podcasts, social media threads and increasingly, in your uncle’s forwarded WhatsApp videos. They are the modern-day philosophers of our fractured democracies: the Armchair Political Commentators.

Armed with a loud voice, a shaky grasp of facts and an unwavering belief in their own importance, these individuals have made it their life’s mission to comment, critique, condemn and occasionally, completely contradict themselves — depending on the channel they’re on and whose party is currently in hot water.

Professional shape-shifters

Watch closely: on Channel A, they are champions of accountability, democracy and the Constitution — passionately defending free speech and transparency. But flip the channel and suddenly they’re lamenting the excesses of free speech, attacking “so-called liberals” and talking about the need for “strong leadership.”

Same person. Same tie. Different panel.

This ability to morph their ideology based on the colour of the studio lighting is not incompetence. No, it’s versatility. Like method actors, they perform for the camera, drawing on an emotional reservoir of second-hand outrage and recycled catch-phrases. “Narrative-building,” “toolkit conspiracy,” “urban naxals,” “institutional overreach” — their vocabulary may be borrowed, but their conviction is 100% original.

Credentials? Don’t ask

You might be tempted to ask: what qualifies these folks to hold forth on matters of national importance? Are they political scientists? Former bureaucrats? Constitutional lawyers?

No, no and absolutely not. They are often self-declared “strategic affairs analysts” (whatever that means), think tank fellows with no visible thesis, or worse, YouTubers who once did a breakdown of the French Revolution with action figures.

And yet, there they are, night after night, analysing everything from border security to fiscal deficits with the same authoritative tone you’d expect from someone explaining how to boil an egg. Confidence, it turns out, is more compelling than competence.

The real superpower: Talking in circles

What makes the armchair commentator such a formidable presence isn’t just their adaptability — it’s their ability to speak at length while saying absolutely nothing.

Give them a minute and they will give you a monologue so dense with jargon and so light on actual meaning that you’ll start questioning your own intelligence. “This issue must be seen through a multi-vector geopolitical lens, especially in light of the asymmetrical information environment and the shifting axis of democratic pluralism.”

What does that mean? Who knows. But it sounds like it means something and that’s all that matters.

Social media: The echo chamber they call home

When they’re not on TV, they’re on social media — re-tweeting themselves, issuing self-important “open letters” and performing outrage with the flair of a Shakespearean understudy. They write threads no one asked for and share articles they didn’t finish, all in the noble pursuit of looking informed.

Their bios are a patchwork of vague accomplishments: “Policy enthusiast | Nation-watcher | Freedom advocate | Re-tweets ≠ endorsement (but yes, they do).”

In short: they’re full-time brand ambassadors of their own opinions.

Debate as theatre, not discourse

What was once supposed to be public discourse has turned into a form of reality entertainment. The debates are less about logic and more about volume. Winning isn’t measured in points made, but in seconds dominated. They interrupt more than they speak. They accuse more than they argue. And they never, ever admit to being wrong.

Because in the world of the armchair political commentator, admitting error is weakness — and worse, it’s bad for engagement.

In conclusion: The experts who knew too little

The armchair political commentator is a creature of our time: loud, visible, always online. They represent the triumph of certainty over substance, style over sense and performance over principle. They may not know much, but they feel a lot — and that’s apparently enough these days.

So the next time you see one wagging a finger on your screen, confidently dissecting international diplomacy with the depth of a dinner table debate, remember that it’s not about the truth. It’s about the optics. And the lighting. And the trending hashtag.

We don’t just live in the age of information — we live in the age of informed-looking ignorance. And no one wears it better than the armchair pundit.

[Dr. R. Balasubramaniam is the founder of Swami Vivekananda Youth Movement and is currently the Member-HR of the Capacity Building Commission, Government of India, New Delhi.]