DYNASTIC RULE DAYS NUMBERED ?
The following article is inspired by an eminent historian and writer Ramchandra Guha.
In 1960, Frank Moraes wrote that " there is no question of ( Jawaharlal Nehru's attempting to create a dynasty rule of his own, it would be inconsistent with his character and career ". Two things are significant about this statement: the year, and the writer. For Nehru's daughter, Indira Gandhi, had just finished a term as President Of Indian National Congress. And by 1960, Moraes had become a sharp critic of Nehru's policies.
Indira Gandhi brought Sanjay Gandhi into public life. During the Emergency of 1975-77, he was the second most powerful person in India, despite not being a minister or even an MP. He was now appointed general secretary, a clear sign that his mother hoped him to succeed her as Prime Minister.
6 months later, Sanjay died in a plane crash. Now Rajiv Gandhi was drafted into politics by his mother, and made general secretary of the Congress. This latter induction showed even more clearly than the 1st that the creation of a dynasty of her own was wholly consistent with the character and career of Indira Gandhi.
In a weak moment, Jawaharlal Nehru allowed Mrs. Gandhi one term as Congress President. His fellow Congressmen, such as Mahatma Gandhi, Vallabhbhai Patel and Rajendra Prasad, steadfastly refused to bring their own progeny into politics. In passing of her mantle to Sanjay and Rajiv, Mrs Gandhi thus acted in violation of Congress tradition. To quite an extent BJP too, does not have much sons and daughters in politics.
Once the oldest and greatest of Indian parties had decided that ideology took second place to genetics, why should the lesser parties stay loyal to their own past creeds ? Consider the career of DMK. This was the 1st successful party in India, whose idelogy embraced far more than opposition to the centre. Apart of dignity of the Tamils, the DMK also promoted caste reform and gender equality. Now all that it worries about is which son of Karunanidhi will succeed him as CM of Tamil Nadu. Or Mulayam Singh Yadav is more committed to socialism than to his son Akhilesh becoming a minister at the Centre or CM of Uttar Pradesh ?
By now, perhaps a dozen parties have become family firms, their rather grandnames notwithstanding. RJD shoud really be known as Lalu, Mrs Lalu & Co, H.D. Dev Gowda And Sons, The NCP as Sharad Pawar and Daughter Inc., Badal & Family ( pvt ) Ltd in Punjab. 6 ministers in Badal's cabinet are from Badal Family out of 18 ministers. When Sukhbir Badal was recently made Deputy CM of Punjab, there was no power cut, which in winters run to approx- 6-7 hours daily. You can imagine, what will happen in summers. But there seems to be one exception to the rule. Omar Abdullah, son of Farooq Abdullah, current CM of J&K seems to be energetic and a man with a vision. But only time will answer that.
That so many parties have followed in the path of Indira Gandhi's Congress has had a negative impact on democracy in India. The Aam Admi asks, is it what democracy all about ? The old idiom " Baap Raja, Beta Vazir, Janta fakir " is proved right in this kind of democracy.
Thus, it may be that the allure and significance of dynastic politics has peaked. It may be that indian voters are disenchanted with the placement of a family's interests above those of the state or country. This might be one conclusion that one can tentatively draw from electrol successes of Mayawati in UP and of Narendra Modi in Gujarat who, despite their ideological differences are yet united in the public eye by the perception that they cant forever be thinking of the interests of their sons or daughters or husbands or wives. Modi's sister is employed in a ordinary school earning Rs.ten thousand monthly.
The hypothesis will be put to the test in the coming Lok Sabha elections and years. Will Stalin be humbled at the polls by a woman who is not a wife or mother, namely, Jayalalitha ? Will Udhav Thackery come to be CM of Maharashtra or even the remote control behind him ? Above all, will Rahul Gandhi ever lead his party to a majority in Parliament, as his father, grandmother and great-grandfather had done before him ? If the answer to these questions are Yes, No and No respectively, one might may definately conclude that the heyday of dynastic politics is behind us.
In 1960, Frank Moraes wrote that " there is no question of ( Jawaharlal Nehru's attempting to create a dynasty rule of his own, it would be inconsistent with his character and career ". Two things are significant about this statement: the year, and the writer. For Nehru's daughter, Indira Gandhi, had just finished a term as President Of Indian National Congress. And by 1960, Moraes had become a sharp critic of Nehru's policies.
Indira Gandhi brought Sanjay Gandhi into public life. During the Emergency of 1975-77, he was the second most powerful person in India, despite not being a minister or even an MP. He was now appointed general secretary, a clear sign that his mother hoped him to succeed her as Prime Minister.
6 months later, Sanjay died in a plane crash. Now Rajiv Gandhi was drafted into politics by his mother, and made general secretary of the Congress. This latter induction showed even more clearly than the 1st that the creation of a dynasty of her own was wholly consistent with the character and career of Indira Gandhi.
In a weak moment, Jawaharlal Nehru allowed Mrs. Gandhi one term as Congress President. His fellow Congressmen, such as Mahatma Gandhi, Vallabhbhai Patel and Rajendra Prasad, steadfastly refused to bring their own progeny into politics. In passing of her mantle to Sanjay and Rajiv, Mrs Gandhi thus acted in violation of Congress tradition. To quite an extent BJP too, does not have much sons and daughters in politics.
Once the oldest and greatest of Indian parties had decided that ideology took second place to genetics, why should the lesser parties stay loyal to their own past creeds ? Consider the career of DMK. This was the 1st successful party in India, whose idelogy embraced far more than opposition to the centre. Apart of dignity of the Tamils, the DMK also promoted caste reform and gender equality. Now all that it worries about is which son of Karunanidhi will succeed him as CM of Tamil Nadu. Or Mulayam Singh Yadav is more committed to socialism than to his son Akhilesh becoming a minister at the Centre or CM of Uttar Pradesh ?
By now, perhaps a dozen parties have become family firms, their rather grandnames notwithstanding. RJD shoud really be known as Lalu, Mrs Lalu & Co, H.D. Dev Gowda And Sons, The NCP as Sharad Pawar and Daughter Inc., Badal & Family ( pvt ) Ltd in Punjab. 6 ministers in Badal's cabinet are from Badal Family out of 18 ministers. When Sukhbir Badal was recently made Deputy CM of Punjab, there was no power cut, which in winters run to approx- 6-7 hours daily. You can imagine, what will happen in summers. But there seems to be one exception to the rule. Omar Abdullah, son of Farooq Abdullah, current CM of J&K seems to be energetic and a man with a vision. But only time will answer that.
That so many parties have followed in the path of Indira Gandhi's Congress has had a negative impact on democracy in India. The Aam Admi asks, is it what democracy all about ? The old idiom " Baap Raja, Beta Vazir, Janta fakir " is proved right in this kind of democracy.
Thus, it may be that the allure and significance of dynastic politics has peaked. It may be that indian voters are disenchanted with the placement of a family's interests above those of the state or country. This might be one conclusion that one can tentatively draw from electrol successes of Mayawati in UP and of Narendra Modi in Gujarat who, despite their ideological differences are yet united in the public eye by the perception that they cant forever be thinking of the interests of their sons or daughters or husbands or wives. Modi's sister is employed in a ordinary school earning Rs.ten thousand monthly.
The hypothesis will be put to the test in the coming Lok Sabha elections and years. Will Stalin be humbled at the polls by a woman who is not a wife or mother, namely, Jayalalitha ? Will Udhav Thackery come to be CM of Maharashtra or even the remote control behind him ? Above all, will Rahul Gandhi ever lead his party to a majority in Parliament, as his father, grandmother and great-grandfather had done before him ? If the answer to these questions are Yes, No and No respectively, one might may definately conclude that the heyday of dynastic politics is behind us.
posted by vaneet kundra at
Sunday, February 01, 2009
5 Comments:
Clearly, dynastic politics needs to have its end shortly. But, as a matter of face, entire system is wrong right now. The current system needs to be removed/terminated to give rise to a more public service oriented mechanism. If that happens, which we hope and will try for, then dynastic rule will be unheard of.
If you joined your ancestral business as you have written in your profile, why do u object politicians sons, if they join their father's profession, politics ?
Dear harru,
I am seeing the end of dynastic rule in India, as i said in my article. Education and awakening in rural areas is going on, but at a slow speed, that too because of our politicians. An educated voter means lot of expectations and no nonsense and corruption. Poor people too have become smart. They take all the goodies from every party, with an assurace for voting for them, but when it comes to actual voting, they vote only for those candidates, who they think is a lesser evil. Corruption has become a mass religion in our country and is taken for granted. So the voter has no choice. We educated people must come to the forefront to join politics. If we dont act now, then we are doomed. Please dont criticise when you dont vote and you shirk from politics. Young and educated people must join politics to get rid of this dynastic rule. The time is not far, when you will see energitic candidates coming to the forefront as we have reached the lowest ebb. we cant go down any more. Logis says, now the graph must go up and it will.
Raj, My joining, ancestral business was not my choice. My father was so dominating, that i had no option. But i dont have regrets. If i would have failed, only me and my immediate family would have suffered whereas in dynastic politics, if you loose and are not capable as your father, then millions of people loose at the cost of dynastic politics, for no fault of theirs. So there is a huge difference. Both the things cant be measured with the same scale.
Really a good distinction between dynasty rule in politics and succeeding a family business. You appear to be clear about both of them. RTI is the weapon against corruption but it will take a long time to come into effect at ground level. I really thank you for this well researched and informative article.
Dear Kumar Kehav,
Thanks. welcome to my blog. RTI act is a farce. Many people have tried this route to gain transparent knowledge and work done by the bureacracy and the politicians, but nothing concrete comes out of it. Remember, the sender of the info to the RTI request are babus, who will never reveal their corrupt practices. Tell me one instance, thru RTI act, any officer or politician being impeached or punished. They give you wrong information. This is my view. We have miles and miles to go, before we become corruption-free society. I shall be lucky, if it happens in my lifetime. Thanks again.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home